Skip to main content

Full text of "A relation of the conference between William Laud, late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury and Mr. Fisher the Jesuit ; by the command of King James of ever blessed memory ; with an answer to such exceptions as A.C. takes against it"

See other formats



















THE    EDITION    OF    1839. 

A     SHORT   narrative   of  the   circumstances  which 
u  occasioned  and  accompanied  this  conference  will 
be  desirable  for  the  general  reader. 

King  James  the  First  exposed  himself  during  the 
whole  of  his  reign  to  much  observation  on  the  part 
of  the  people  in  general,  and  to  repeated  complaints  on 
the  part  of  his  parliaments,  for  the  forbearance  and 
clemency  that  he  exercised  towards  his  Roman  catholic 
subjects.  From  the  commencement  of  his  reign,  when 
he  signified  that  he  felt  himself  under  personal  a  obli- 
gation to  the  pontiff,  to  the  last  year  of  it,  when  he 
received  from  the  two  houses  of  parliament  "  a  b  sting- 
ing petition  against  the  papists,"  whether  he  was  em- 

a  Wilkins,  Concilia,  vol.  iv.  p.  377.  "  We  acknowledge  our- 
selves personally  so  much  beholding  to  the  now  bishop  of  Rome 
[Clement  VIII.]  for  his  kind  offices  and  private  temporal  carriage 
towards  us  in  many  things."  Cornp.  Rush  worth,  vol.  i.  p.  166. 
Hallam,  Const.  Hist.  vol.  i.  p.  437,  note. 

b  Rushworth,  vol.  i.  p.  140. 

a  2 


ployed  in  thwarting  the.  designs  of  the  puritans,  or 
negociating  for  the  marriage  of  his  son  with  the  infanta 
of  Spain,  he  continually  kept  alive  suspicions  of  his 
Romish  tendencies,  which  neither  his  frequent  pro- 
fessions of  neutrality,  nor  his  learned  treatises  against 
the  usurpations  and  corruptions  of  popery,  were  suffi- 
cient to  overcome.  Whatever  might  be  the  specu- 
lative opinions  of  the  king,  it  is  clear  that  the  character 
of  his  mind,  and  the  principles  of  his  government,  civil 
and  ecclesiastical,  were  in  accordance  with  the  genuine 
spirit  of  the  Vatican ;  and  it  was  natural  for  his  subjects 
to  suppose  that  if  he  could  have  obtained  full  security 
for  the  acknowledgment  of  his  supremacy  as  a  sove- 
reign, he  would  willingly  have  surrendered  many  of  the 
theological  points  at  issue,  in  order  to  a  readmission 
into  the  Romish  communion. 

Now  had  circumstances  been  much  less  favourable  to 
the  Romanists,  their  wily  policy  would  still  have  found 
materials  and  opportunities  for  converting  them  to  their 
own  advantage;  but  at  a  time  when  the  powerful  appeals, 
that  they  could  make  to  the  fears  and  imaginations  of 
their  hearers,  had  the  appearance  of  being  more  reason- 
able from  the  utter  want  of  unity  among  the  protestants, 
and  were  actually  more  attractive,  owing  to  the  alleged 
favour  of  the  court,  they  disregarded  the  severe  penal- 
ties of  the  laws,  and  proclaimed  openly  the  greater 
security  of  their  profession  of  faith,  and  the  rapid 
increase  of  their  numbers.  The  king  indeed  still 
denounced,  as  crimes  against  the  state,  such  offences  as 
exercising  the  functions  of  a  Romish  priest,  seducing 
his  subjects  from  the  religion  established,  and  scandal- 
izing his  actual  government ;  but  his  real  intentions 
were  interpreted  much  more  from  his  acts  of  forbear- 
ance than  from  his  threats  of  punishment,  and  in  order 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  v 

to  make  his  views  in  this  respect  clearly  understood, 
his  protestant  subjects  were  told  that  they  had  no  right 
"  to  c  argue  '  a  concrete  ad  abstractum,'  or  to  infer  that 
he  countenanced  the  Romish  religion,  because  he  con- 
ferred favours  on  the  papists." 

Among   the   emissaries  whom   the  Romanists  em- 


ployed  at  this  time  in  England,  one  of  the  most  active 
and  intelligent  was  a  Jesuit  of  the  name  of  Piersey, 
who  has  been  better  known  under  the  assumed  appella- 
tion of  Fisher d.  He  had  obtained  admission  to  the 
countess,  mother  of  Villiers,  who  was  afterwards  duke 
of  Buckingham,  and  had  made  some  progress  in  con- 
verting her  to  the  Romish  faith,  in  the  hope  that 
through  the  influence  of  her  son,  she  might  be  able  to 
obtain  further  indulgences  from  the  court  in  favour  of  the 
Roman  catholics.  The  duke  of  Buckingham,  anxious 
that  justice  should  be  done  to  the  whole  of  the  im- 
portant argument,  requested  Dr.  Francis  White6,  who 
had  obtained  a  reputation,  from  his  sermons  preached  at 
St.  Paul's,  for  skill  in  the  Romish  controversy,  to  meet 
the  Jesuit,  and  maintain  the  cause  of  protestantism,  in 
the  presence  of  the  countess,  the  lord  keeper  Williams, 
and  himself.  An  occurrence  of  so  much  interest,  con- 

c  See  a  letter  of  the  lord  keeper  Williams  in  the  Cabala,  p.  294. 

d  He  was  a  native  of  Yorkshire,  and  after  having  studied  at 
Rome  and  Lou  vain,  became  a  Jesuit  in  the  year  1594.  He  soon 
afterwards  employed  himself  in  England  in  making  proselytes, 
and  was  convicted  and  banished.  He  returned,  however,  as  soon 
as  he  found  that  it  could  be  done  safely,  in  the  reign  of  James  I., 
and  is  said  to  have  died  at  the  end  of  the  year  1641.  Biblioth. 
Script.  Societ.  Jes.  p.  263.  Ed.  Antv.  1643. 

e  Dr.  F.  White,  rector  of  St.  Peter's,  Cornhill,  and  chaplain  to 
the  king,  became  dean  of  Carlisle  in  1622  ;  bishop  of  Carlisle  in 
1626;  bishop  of  Norwich  in  1628;  and  bishop  of  Ely  in  1631. 
He  died  in  February,  1637. 

a  3 


nected  so  directly  with  the  person  of  the  favourite,  was 
soon  communicated  to  the  king  ;  and  a  second  con- 
ference was  accordingly  arranged,  at  which  the  king 
himself  was  present,  and  many  particular  questions  of 
theology  were  discussed. 

But  there  Avere  two  important  points  in  which  neither 
the  king  nor  the  countess  was  satisfied  with  the  manage- 
ment of  this  conference.  The  king  observed,  that  Fisher 
had  been  skilful,  and  not  altogether  unsuccessful,  in 
replying  to  his  opponent ;  but  had  not  in  the  same 
degree  established,  by  positive  proof,  any  propositions  of 
his  own.  The  countess  complained  that  nothing  had 
been  said  respecting  the  claim  which  the  Romanists 
make  to  a  visible  and  infallible  church ;  a  claim  which 
she  seemed  to  consider  as  necessary  for  the  existence  of 
a  church,  and  which,  in  weak  and  wavering  minds,  has 
ever  inspired  a  feeling  in  favour  of  the  communion  of 
Rome.  For  this  latter  purpose  it  was  determined  that 
a  third  conference  should  be  held ;  and  Dr.  Laud,  then 
bishop  of  St.  David's,  who  was  distinguished  for  his 
theological  learning,  and  had  recently  given  the  king- 
evidence  of  his  great  skill  in  composition,  was  appointed 
to  conduct  the  argument  on  the  side  of  protestantism. 
To  satisfy  also  the  mind  of  the  king  as  to  the  capacity 
of  the  Romanists  for  positive  proof,  he  proposed  nine 
questions  to  the  Jesuit,  on  which  he  required  to  have 
distinct  and  categorical  answers,  prefacing  them  with 
this  strong  inducement,  that  "  he  desired  satisfaction  on 
some  of  the  principal  points,  which  withheld  him  from 
joining  unto  the  church  of  Rome." 

On  the  24th  of  May,  1622,  the  third  conference  took 
place,  between  bishop  Laud  on  the  one  part,  and  Fisher 
on  the  other,  in  the  presence  of  the  same  royal  and 
noble  personages,  and  with  the  addition  of  others,  and 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  vii 

more  especially  of  the  lord  keeper  Williams,  who  occa- 
sionally took  part  in  the  discussion. 

The  bishop  states  in  his  preface  that  he  had  "  no 
instruction  at  all  what  should  be  the  ground  of  this 
third  conference,  nor  the  full  time  of  four  and  twenty 
hours  to  bethink  himself;"  and  this  is  in  accordance 
with  the  entries f  which  he  made  at  the  same  time  in 
his  private  diary.  But  it  is  also  clear  from  the  same 
authority,  that  he  was  acquainted  with  the  earlier  part 
of  the  discussion,  and  in  some  degree  a  party  concerned 
in  it,  as  it  was  going  on ;  and  there  can  be  little  doubt 
as  to  his  perfect  and  ready  knowledge  of  the  whole 
subject  matter  of  the  controversy. 

It  appears  that  no  notes  were  taken  at  the  time  by 
Dr.  White,  of  the  two  first  conferences,  and  that  after- 

f  The  following  are  the  entries  made  in  his  diary  in  connection 
with  this  conference. 

1622.  April  23.  Being  the  Tuesday  in  Easter  week,  the  king  sent 
for  me,  and  set  me  into  a  course  about  the  countess  of  Buck- 
ingham, who  about  that  time  was  wavering  in  point  of 

April  24.  Dr.  Francis  White  and  I  met  about  this. 

May  10.  I  went  to  the  court  to  Greenwich,  and  came  back  in 
coach  with  the  lord  marquess  Buckingham.  My  promise  then 
to  give  his  lordship  the  discourse  he  spake  to  me  for. 

May  19.  I  delivered  my  lord  marquess  Buckingham  the  paper 
concerning  the  difference  between  the  church  of  England  and 
Rome,  in  point  of  salvation,  &c. 

May  23.  My  first  speech  with  the  countess  of  Buckingham. 

May  24.  The  conference  between  Mr.  Fisher,  a  Jesuit,  and 
myself,  before  the  lord  marquess  Buckingham,  and  the 
countess,  his  mother.  I  had  much  speech  with  her  after. 

June  9.  Being  Whit-Sunday,  my  lord  marquess  Buckingham  was 
pleased  to  enter  upon  a  near  respect  to  me.  The  particulars 
are  not  for  paper. 

June  15.  I  became  C.  to  my  lord  of  Buckingham. 
\  a  4 

viii  PREFACE  TO 

wards,  when  he  drew  up  a  memorial  of  them,  he  acknow- 
ledged that  he  s"  did  not  exactly  remember  all  the 
passages  of  the  disputation."  It  appears  also  that 
bishop  Laud  drew  up  a  narrative  of  the  third  con- 
ference, during  the  Michaelmas  term  of  1622,  but  that 
in  his  case  no  doubt  was  expressed  as  to  its  perfect 
accuracy.  As  these  papers  were  not  published  till  the 
year  1624,  it  is  necessary  to  explain  why  so  long  a 
silence  should  have  been  observed,  on  subjects  too  of 
so  much  interest  and  importance. 

Although  a  strict  injunction  had  been  given  that  no 
account  of  these  conferences  should  be  published,  which 
had  not  been  seen  and  approved  by  both  the  parties 
engaged  in  them,  Fisher  did  not  neglect  the  oppor- 
tunity they  afforded  him  of  circulating  a  relation  of 
what  had  past,  and  expressing  himself  to  the  great 
disadvantage  of  his  opponents.  It  is  not  necessary  to 
suppose  that  he  misrepresented  them  designedly ;  as  in 
a  controversy  of  that  nature  it  was  not  possible  that  a 
person  so  educated,  who  had  also  taken  so  prominent  a 
part  in  the  dispute,  should  be  able  to  hold  the  balance 
truly.  The  fact  however  was,  that  the  arguments  on 
the  Protestant  side  appeared,  as  he  represented  them, 
to  be  extremely  "  unskilful  and  childish h;"  and  the 
whole  discussion  was  exhibited  in  a  manner  disgraceful 
to  his  opponents  and  creditable  to  himself.  This  was 
in  itself  a  sufficient  reason  with  bishop  Laud  and  Dr. 
White  for  setting  forth,  on  their  side,  as  faithful  narra- 
tives as  they  could,  of  the  three  conferences ;  and  this 
reason  was  much  strengthened  by  the  results  of  other 
disputations  held  about  the  same  time,  which  the  Jesuits, 
both  in  England  and  abroad,  were  describing  according 

S  See  White's  preface,  p.  3.  h  White's  preface,  p.  3. 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  ix 

to  their  views  of  them,  and  employing  for  their  own 
benefit.  On  the  27th  of  June,  1623,  the  same  Dr. 
White  was  engaged  in  another  discussion i  of  the  same 
nature  with  Fisher,  assisted  by  Dr.  Featley  on  the  one 
side,  and  a  Jesuit,  of  the  name  of  Sweet,  on  the  other, 
at  the  house  of  Sir  Humfrey  Lynde,  and  in  the  presence 
of  many  of  his  friends.  This  discussion  led  to  the  pub- 
lication of  many  letters  and  pamphlets,  in  which  the 
Jesuits  boasted  of  their  success,  and  treated  their  oppo- 
nents in  a  manner  calculated  to  do  much  mischief,  in 
common  minds,  to  the  Protestant  cause.  But  it  was 
still  thought  by  bishop  Laud  and  Dr.  White  to  be  too 
early  to  publish  their  respective  narratives.  They  had 
not  yet  examined  the  answers  which  Fisher  had  been 
preparing  to  the  king's  nine  questions,  and  they  natur- 
ally wished  the  whole  transaction  to  be  included  in  one 
work,  embracing  the  entire  controversy,  and  giving 
them  the  advantage  of  appearing  in  the  way  of  refuta- 
tion, as  well  as  in  the  more  laborious  work  of  positive 

The  subjects  proposed  by  king  James  to  Fisher  were 
the  following.  1.  The  worship  of  images.  2.  The 
prayers  and  offering  oblations  to  the  blessed  Virgin 
Mary.  3.  Worshipping  and  invocation  of  saints  and 
angels.  4.  The  Liturgy  and  private  prayers  for  the 
ignorant,  in  an  unknown  tongue.  5.  Repetitions  of 
Pater  Nosters,  Aves,  and  Creeds,  especially  affixing  a 
kind  of  merit  to  the  number  of  them.  6.  The  doc- 
trine of  transubstantiation.  7.  Communion  under  one 
kind,  and  the  abetting  of  it  by  concomitancy.  8.  Works 
of  supererogation,  especially  with  reference  unto  the 

i  An  account  of  it  was  published  by  Dr.  Featley,  under  the 
title,  "The  Romish  Fisher  caught  and  held  in  his  own  net." 
London,  1624. 


treasure  of  the  church.  9-  The  opinion  of  deposing 
kings,  and  giving  away  their  kingdoms  by  papal  power, 
whether  directly  or  indirectly.  To  these  questions 
Fisher  drew  up  his  answer  separately;  but  he  pru- 
dently and  dexterously  omitted  the  last,  alleging  as 
his  excuse,  that  "  the  constitutions  of  his  order  in  se- 
verest manner  charge  him  no  ways  to  meddle  in  state- 
matters  or  in  princes'  affairs  ;  much  less  under  pretence 
of  religion,  to  attempt  any  thing  or  to  consent  to  any 
enterprize  that  may  disturb  the  quiet  and  tranquillity 
of  kings  and  kingdoms." 

This  work  of  Fisher  was  not  published  by  him  in 
the  first  instance,  but  was  delivered  to  king  James  in 
writing,  and  was  afterwards  transferred,  according  to 
the  king's  original  intention,  to  Dr.  White,  to  be  exa- 
mined and  answered.  Besides  the  arguments  on  the 
eight  first  questions,  the  work  contained  a  preliminary 
dissertation  on  the  rule  of  faith,  the  sum  and  substance 
of  the  two  earlier  conferences  in  which  the  writer  had 
been  engaged  with  Dr.  White,  and  nine  charges  of  re- 
markable error  brought  against  the  church  of  England, 
as  a  counterpoise  to  the  nine  questions  propounded  by 
the  king.  To  this  work  of  Fisher  Dr.  White  sent 
forth  his  Reply,  in  April,  1624,  reciting  the  whole  of 
Fisher's  work  in  distinct  portions,  and  adding  his  own 
comments  and  answers,  with  copious  quotations  of  the 
authorities  on  which  he  relied.  At  the  same  time,  and 
as  an  accompaniment  to  Dr.  White's  Reply,  was  pub- 
lished, "  An  Answer1  to  Mr.  Fisher's  Relation  of  the 
Third  Conference,"  drawn  up  in  reality,  as  he  after- 
wards acknowledged,  by  bishop  Laud,  but  ascribed  in 
the  title-page  to  R.  B.  [Richard  Baylie,]  the  bishop's 

1  It    is  noticed  thus    in    the    Diary,    "  April    16,  Friday.    My 
conference  with  Fisher  the  Jesuit,  printed,  came  forth." 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  xi 

Leaving  then  Dr.  White's  Reply,  with  the  many 
publications  from  Fisher  and  others  to  which  it  gave 
occasion,  our  attention  must  now  be  confined  to  the 
third  conference,  and  the  Narrative  of  it  which  had 
been  published  by  bishop  Laud. 

This  Narrative  naturally  attracted  much  notice,  and 
was  generally  assigned  to  its  real  author.  The  most 
important  answer  to  it  was  a  book  published  in  the 
year  1626,  and  written,  as  was  believed,  by  Fisher  him- 
self, under  the  assumed  initials,  A.  C.  Fisher,  though 
he  had  fearlessly  given  his  own  name  or  initials  in 
other  instances,  felt  it  necessary  to  be  cautious  in  at- 
tacking an  opponent  of  so  much  authority,  and  the 
more  so,  as  he  did  not  intend  to  be  very  scrupulous  in 
his  own  mode  of  warfare.  He  used  initials  therefore, 
which  would  not  lead  to  a  discovery,  and  which  he 
seems  to  have  employed  in  another  case  in  the  year 
1623,  when  he  published111  his  account  of  the  Con- 
ference, held  in  the  house  of  Sir  Humfrey  Lynde.  But 
for  many  years  Dr.  Laud,  who  in  the  year  1633  be- 
came archbishop  of  Canterbury,  took  no  further  notice 
of  his  antagonist.  Oppressed  by  sickness,  overwhelmed 
with  public  business,  or  mourning  over  the  miseries  of 
his  country,  he  could  not  give  either  time  or  attention 
to  a  subject,  in  which,  however  deeply  he  was  inter- 
ested in  it,  and  however  earnestly  he  was  solicited  by 
others  to  undertake  it,  his  services  were  not  indispen- 
sably required.  But  having  at  length  received  from 
king  Charles  an  expression  of  his  wish,  that  the  whole 
question,  with  Fisher's  farther  observations,  should  be 
fully  and  finally  discussed  by  him,  he  reconstructed  his 
work  in  the  enlarged  and  amended  form  in  which  we 

m  Under  this  title,  "  An  Answer  to  a  Pamphlet  entituled, 
'  The  Fisher  catched  in  his  owne  net/  by  A.  C.,  1623." 


now  have  it,  and  published  it  in  February11,  1639-  It 
was  a  time  at  which  the  archbishop  still  felt  himself 
at  liberty  to  say,  "  The  church  of  England0  (God  be 
thanked)  thrives  happily  under  a  gracious  prince,  and 
well  understands  that  a  parliament  cannot  be  called 
at  all  times  ;  and  that  there  are  visible  judges  besides 
the  law-books,  and  one  supreme  (long  may  he  be,  and 
be  happy)  to  settle  all  temporal  differences :"  and  yet 
within  a  few  days  afterwards  (February  2?th,  1639-) 
the  king  issued  his  declaration  P  of  war  against  his 
northern  subjects,  which,  in  the  distracted  temper  of 
those  times,  led  by  gradual  but  certain  consequence 
to  the  overthrow  of  the  church,  the  murder  of  the 
sovereign,  and  the  destruction  of  all  rational  and 
established  freedom. 

The  Archbishop's  edition  of  1639  was  reprinted  in 
the  year  1673,  and  again  in  1686  ;  but  I  have  not 
met  with  a  copy  of  any  more  recent  impression. 
The  initials  used  in  the  course  of  this  Relation  are 

33.  Bishop  Laud. 

$.  Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

D.  W.    Dr.   Francis   White   who    disputed   with 
Fisher  in  the  two  first  Conferences. 

L.  K.  Lord  Keeper  Williams,  bishop  of  Lincoln, 
who  took  part  occasionally  in  the  dispute. 

A.  C.  The  initials  under  which  Fisher  replied  to 
bishop  Laud's  first  printed  account  of  his  Conference. 

There  are  two  points  connected  with  the  contents 
of  this  work,  on  which  it  may  be  right  to  offer  a  few 

n  It  is  noticed  thus  in  his  Diary.  "  Feb.  10.  My  book 
against  Fisher  the  Jesuit  was  printed,  and  this  day,  being  Sunday, 
I  delivered  a  copy  to  his  majesty." 

o  Seep.  175. 

P  Rymer,  Foedera,  vol.  xx.  p.  290. 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  xiii 

observations.  The  one  bears  upon  the  question  of  the 
divine  authority  of  the  scriptures,  the  other  upon  their 
exclusive  authority. 

In  the  Archbishops'  Preface  we  have  the  following- 
passage.  "  According  to  Christ's  institution,  the  scrip- 
ture, where  it  is  plain,  should  guide  the  church  ;  and 
the  church,  where  there  is  doubt  or  difficulty,  should 
expound  the  scripture;  yet  so,  as  neither  the  scrip- 
ture should  be  forced,  nor  the  church  so  bound  up, 
as  that  upon  just  and  further  evidence,  she  may  not 
revise  that  which  in  any  case  hath  slipt  by  her."  Now 
this  rule,  when  compared  with  the  6th  Article  of 
the  Church  of  England,  appears  to  be  expressed  with 
too  much  latitude  in  favour  of  the  church.  If  in 
endeavouring  to  interpret  scripture  on  any  point  of 
faith,  the  result  is  doubt  or  difficulty,  it  would  seem 
to  be  evident  that,  so  far  forth,  the  point  in  question 
was  "  neither  read  therein  nor  could  be  proved  there- 
by," and  that  the  church  could  not  require  that  point 
as  necessary  to  salvation.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that 
different  minds,  according  to  their  mode  of  training, 
will  form  different  judgments  in  a  given  case  as  to 
the  conclusiveness  of  the  proof  from  scripture;  and 
that  the  one  party  will  appeal,  however  unprofitably, 
to  the  authority  of  the  church,  in  order  to  supply  the 
deficiency  of  proof  which  has  been  alleged  by  the 
other.  But  it  is  also  true,  that  the  party  which  feels 
the  doubt  will  always  have  recourse  to  the  rule  of  the 
6th  Article  in  justification  of  its  scruples,  and  the 
dispute  will  terminate  in  the  same  difference  of  belief 
in  which  it  was  begun.  The  best,  and  indeed  the 
common,  illustration  of  the  case  is  to  be  found  in  the 
practice  of  infant-baptism ;  and  it  is  the  more  desir- 
able to  adduce  it,  because  it  can  be  given  in  the  words 


of  the  Archbishop  himself,  and  will  shew,  by  a  definite 
and  appropriate  instance,  in  what  manner,  when  apply- 
ing his  own  rule,  he  limited  and  corrected  it.  "  ^1 
answer  to  the  instance  which  A.  C.  makes  concerning 
the  baptism  of  infants,  that  it  may  be  concluded 
directly  (and  let  A.  C.  judge,  whether  not  demonstra- 
tively) out  of  scripture,  both  that  infants  ought  to  be 
baptized,  and  that  baptism  is  necessary  to  their  salva- 
tion." And  again :  "  rl  will  add  this  concerning  this 
particular,  the  baptizing  of  infants,  that  the  church 
received  this  by  tradition  from  the  apostles.  By  tradi- 
tion. And  what  then?  May  it  not  directly  be  con- 
cluded out  of  scripture,  because  it  was  delivered  to  the 
church  by  way  of  tradition  ?  I  hope  A.  C.  will  never 
say  so."  So  then  in  his  judgment,  though  the  practice 
of  infant-baptism  was  received  by  tradition,  it  rests 
for  its  authority  upon  scripture.  Tradition,  therefore, 
cannot  give  the  proof,  although  it  may  be  employed 
in  the  way  of  suggestion  before  the  proof  is  sought, 
or  in  the  way  of  confirmation  when  the  proof  is  already 

The  other  point  to  which  it  may  be  proper  to  advert 
is  contained  in  the  following  statement.  "  sThe  way 
lies  thus  (as  far  as  it  appears  to  me) ;  The  credit  of 
scripture  to  be  divine  resolves  finally  into  that  faith 
which  we  have  touching  God  himself,  and  in  the  same 
order.  For  as  that,  so  this  hath  three  main  grounds,  to 
which  all  other  are  reducible.  The  first  is,  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  church ;  and  this  leads  us  to  a  reverend 
persuasion  of  it.  The  second  is,  the  light  of  nature ; 
and  this  shews  us  how  necessary  such  a  revealed  learn- 
ing is,  and  that  no  other  way  it  can  be  had ;  nay  more, 
that  all  proofs  brought  against  any  point  of  faith  neither 

q  See  p.  45.  r  See  p.  48.  «  See  p.  94. 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  xv 

are  nor  can  be  demonstrations,  but  soluble  arguments. 
The  third  is,  the  light  of  the  text  itself,  in  conversing 
wherewith  we  meet  with  the  Spirit  of  God  inwardly 
inclining  our  hearts,  and  sealing  the  full  assurance  of 
the  sufficiency  of  all  three  unto  us.  And  then,  and  not 
before,  we  are  certain  that  the  scripture  is  the  word  of 
God,  both  by  divine  and  by  infallible  proof:  but  our 
certainty  is  by  faith,  and  so  voluntary,  not  by  know- 
ledge of  such  principles  as  in  the  light  of  nature  can 
enforce  assent  whether  we  will  or  no."  This  expla- 
nation will  scarcely  satisfy  a  reader  of  discriminating 
mind.  The  question  here  is  clearly  not  respecting  the 
time  or  order  in  which  the  minds  of  persons  in  a  Chris- 
tian country  become  sensible  of  the  authority  of  scrip- 
ture, but  respecting  the  method  and  course  of  inquiry 
by  which  such  authority  is  at  any  time  to  be  ascer- 
tained: it  is  therefore  not  a  question  respecting  the 
force  of  education  or  the  teaching  of  the  Church,  but 
respecting  the  investigation  of  evidence,  and  the  gradual 
construction  of  proof.  The  process  then  in  such  a  case 
is  this.  The  Christian  scriptures  are  records  of  past 
events,  and  must  be  tested  and  interpreted  by  the 
common  methods  by  which  the  genuineness  and  mean- 
ing of  any  documents  of  like  date  and  language  are 
ascertained.  These  steps  fully  secured,  the  contents 
are  then  to  be  examined,  as  to  the  degree  of  credit 
that  attaches  to  them.  Thus  far  the  inquiry  is  one  in 
which  a  man's  judgment  must  decide  for  him ;  his  own 
judgment  altogether  and  exclusively,  if  he  believe  that 
he  is  competent  to  the  task  of  examination ;  and  again 
his  own  judgment  in  deference  to  that  of  others,  if  he 
is  conscious  that  he  is  not  competent ;  but  still  in  both 
cases,  his  own  judgment,  whether  he  exercise  it  inde- 
pendently of  others,  or  willingly  place  it  under  their 


guidance,  after  acknowledging  his  own  insufficiency  and 
approving  of  their  fitness.  It  is  the  same  process 
which  would  be  followed  with  respect  to  any  historical 
records ;  but  with  this  difference,  that  there  is  no  other 
history  whatever  of  remote  events,  which  is  attested 
by  so  many  kinds  and  so  high  a  degree  of  evidence, 
derived  from  earlier  adaptations,  from  contemporary 
and  unimpeachable  witnesses,  from  corroborative  and 
traditionary  testimony,  from  the  results  that  have  been 
impressed  on  all  succeeding  times,  and  more  especially 
from  the  clear  and  pervading  tokens  of  God's  provi- 
dential government,  all  of  which  converge  to  the  same 
point  of  moral  demonstration.  But  now  another  prin- 
ciple interposes.  The  contents  of  these  scriptures  shew 
not  only  the  trust-worthiness  of  the  narrative,  but  also 
miraculous  agency  and  a  divine  commission;  and  the 
question  accordingly  is  so  far  changed,  that  though,  as 
matter  of  evidence,  it  has  hitherto  been  a  case  for  pri- 
vate judgment,  as  matter  of  teaching  it  has  now  become 
a  case  for  religious  faith.  On  principles  strictly  ra- 
tional, the  mind  must  now  surrender  itself  to  the  teach- 
ing of  the  scriptures  as  to  a  supreme  and  infallible 
authority ;  still  exercising  its  judgment  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  that  teaching,  but  on  its  own  principles  deferring 
to  the  judgment  of  those,  whether  individuals  or  bodies 
of  men,  who  have  had  the  best  means  of  information, 
and  have  given  distinct  and  authoritative  opinions  on 
the  subject. 

The  Archbishop's  deliberate  opinion  on  the  part  that 
he  had  taken  in  this  controversy  may  be  given  in  the 
words  delivered  by  him  on  his  trial,  with  the  addition 
that  he  made  during  his  imprisonment  in  the  Tower. 
"  My  s  book  against  Fisher  hath  been  charged  against 

8  History  of  the  Troubles  and  Trial,  £c.  by  Wharton,  p.  418. 

THE  EDITION  OF  1839.  xvii 

me  :  where  the  argument  must  lie  thus  ;  I  have  endea- 
voured to  advance  Popery,  because  I  have  written 
against  it.  And  with  what  strength  I  have  written, 
I  leave  to  posterity  to  judge,  when  the  envy,  which 
now  overloads  me,  shall  be  buried  with  me.  This  I  will 
say  with  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  (whose  success  at  Con- 
stantinople was  not  much  unlike  mine  here,  save  that 
his  life  was  not  sought,)  '  *I  never  laboured  for  peace  to 
the  wrong  and  detriment  of  Christian  verity,'  nor  I 
hope  ever  shall.  [And  let  the  church  of  England  look 
to  it  ;  for  in  great  humility  I  crave  to  write  this  (though 
then  was  no  time  to  speak  it)  that  the  church  of  Eng- 
land must  leave  the  way  it  is  now  going,  and  come 
back  to  that  way  of  defence  which  I  have  followed  in 
my  book,  or  she  shall  never  be  able  to  justify  her  sepa- 
ration from  the  church  of  Rome]." 


March  16,  1839. 

Ovre  elprjvfvoiJifv  Kara  TOV  \6yov  TTJS  aXrjOfias  ixfrtevrfs  n  8ia  d6£av 
.  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  32.  vol.  i.  p.  518.  Ed.  Par.  1630. 




BY    THE    GRACE    OF    GOD, 



THIS  tract  will  need  patronage  as  great  as  may  be  had; 
that  is  yours.  Yet,  when  I  first  printed  part  of  it,  I 
presumed  not  to  ask  any,  but  thrust  it  out  at  the  end  of 
another's  labours,  that  it  might  seem  at  least  to  have  the 
same  patron,  your  royal  father  of  blessed  memory,  as  the 
other  work  on  which  this  attended  had.  But  now  I  humbly 
beg  for  it  your  Majesty's  patronage,  and  leave  withal  that  I 
may  declare  to  your  most  excellent  Majesty  the  cause  why  this 
Tract  was  then  written ;  why  it  stayed  so  long  before  it  looked 
upon  the  light ;  why  it  was  not  then  thought  fit  to  go  alone, 
but  rather  be  led  abroad  by  the  former  work ;  why  it  comes 
now  forth  both  with  alteration  and  addition ;  and  why  this 
addition  made  not  more  haste  to  the  press  than  it  hath  done. 
The  cause  why  this  discourse  was  written  was  this  :  I  was, 
at  the  time  of  these  conferences  with  Mr.  Fisher,  bishop  of  St. 
David's  ;  and  not  only  directed,  but  commanded  by  my  blessed 
master,  king  James,  to  this  conference  with  him.  He,  awhen 
we  met,  began  with  a  great  protestation  of  seeking  the  truth 
only,  and  that  for  itself.  And  certainly,  truth,  especially  in 
religion,  is  so  to  be  sought,  or  not  to  be  found.  He  that  seeks 
it  with  a  Roman  b  bias  or  any  other,  will  run  counter  when 

a  May  24, 1622.  August,  lib.  n".  cont.  Adversarium  Legis 

b  One  of  these  biases  is  an  aversion  et  Prophet.     And  it  is  an  easy  transi- 

from   all   such    truth   as  fits   not    our  tion  for  a  man  that  is  averse  from,  to 

ends.     And  aver  sits  a  veritatis  luce,  ob  become  adverse  to  the  truth. 
hoc  luci  veritatis  adversus  (fit),  &c.    S. 


he  comes  near  it,  and  not  find  it,  though  he  come  within 
kenning  of  it.  And  therefore  I  did  most  heartily  wish  I  could 
have  found  the  Jesuit  upon  that  fair  way  he  protested  to  go. 
After  the  conference  ended,  I  went,  whither  my  duty  called 
me,  to  my  diocess,  not  suspecting  any  thing  should  be  made 
public  that  was  both  commanded  and  acted  in  private.  For 
W.  I.,  the  publisher  of  the  Relation  of  the  first  Conference 
with  Dr.  White,  (the  late  reverend  and  learned  bishop  of 
Ely,)  c  confesses  plainly,  "  That  Mr.  Fisher  was  straitly 
charged  upon  his  allegiance  from  his  majesty  that  then  was, 
not  to  set  out  or  publish  what  passed  in  some  of  these  con- 
ferences till  he  gave  license,  and  until  Mr.  Fisher  and  they 
might  meet,  and  agree  and  confirm  under  their  hands  what 
was  said  on  both  sides.1'  He  says  further,  "  That  dMr. 
Fisher  went  to  Dr.  White's  house  to  know  what  he  would  say 
about  the  Relation  which  he  had  set  out."  So  then,  belike 
Mr.  Fisher  had  set  out  the  Relation  of  that  conference  before 
he  went  to  Dr.  White  to  speak  about  it.  And  this,  not- 
withstanding the  king's  restraint  upon  him  upon  his  alle- 
giance. Yet  to  Dr.  White,  it  is  said,  he  went,  but  to  what 
other  end  than  to  put  a  scorn  upon  him,  I  cannot  see.  For  he 
went  to  his  house  to  know  what  he  would  say  about  that  Rela- 
tion of  the  conference  which  he  had  set  out  before.  In  my 
absence  from  London,  Mr.  Fisher  used  me  as  well.  For  with 
the  same  care  of  his  allegiance  and  no  more,  ehe  spread 

c  Tn  the  epistle  to  the  reader.  a  most  plain  confession  by  A.  C.  of  that 
d  Ibid.  which  he  struggles  to  deny.  He  says, 
e  These  words  were  in  my  former  "  he  did  not  spread  papers."  What 
epistle.  And  A.C.  checks  at  them  in  then?  What?  Why,  he  did  but  deliver 
defence  of  the  Jesuit,  and  says,  ''  That  copies.  Why,  but  doth  not  he  that  de- 
the  Jesuit  did  not  at  all  so  much  as  in  livers  copies  (for  instance,  of  a  libel) 
speech,  and  much  less  in  papers,  pub-  spread  it  ?  Yea,  but  he  delivered  but  a 
lish  this  or  either  of  the  other  two  con-  very  few  copies.  Be  it  so :  I  do  not 
ferences  with  Dr.  White,  till  he  was  say  how  many  he  spread.  He  confesses 
forced  unto  it  by  false  reports  given  out  the  Jesuit  delivered  some,  though  very 
to  his  private  disgrace,  and  the  preju-  few ;  and  he  that  delivers  any  spreads 
dice  of  the  catholic  cause.  Nor  then  it  abroad.  For  what  can  he  tell,  when 
did  he  spread  papers  abroad,  but  only  the  copies  are  once  out  of  his  power, 
delivered  a  very  few  copies  to  special  how  many  may  copy  them  out  and 
friends,  and  this  not  with  an  intent  to  spread  them  further  ?  Yea,  but  he  de- 
calumniate  the  bishop,"  &c.  A.  C.  in  livered  them  to  special  friends.  Be  it 
his  Preface  before  his  Relation  of  this  so  too  :  the  more  special  friends  they 
Conference.  Truly,  I  knew  of  no  re-  were  to  him,  the  less  indifferent  would 
ports  then  given  out  to  the  prejudice  of  they  be  to  me,  perhaps  my  more  special 
the  Jesuit's  either  person  or  cause.  I  enemies.  Yea,  but  all  this  was  without 
was  in  a  corner  of  the  kingdom  where  an  intent  to  calumniate  me.  Well,  be 
I  heard  little.  But  howsoever,  here  is  that  so  too.  But  if  I  be  calumniated 


abroad  papers  of  this  conference,  full  enough  of  partiality  to 
his  cause,  and  more  full  of  calumny  against  me.  Hereupon  I 
was  in  a  manner  forced  to  give  Mr.  Fisher's  Relation  of  the 
Conference  an  answer,  and  to  publish  it.  Though  for  some 
reasons,  and  those  then  approved  by  authority,  it  was  thought 
fit  I  should  set  it  out  in  my  chaplain's  name,  R.  B.,  and  not 
in  my  own.  To  which  I  readily  submitted. 

There  was  a  cause  also,  why  at  the  first  the  discourse  upon 
this  conference  stayed  so  long  before  it  could  endure  to  be 
pressed.  For  the  conference  was  in  May,  1622.  And  Mr. 
Fisher's  paper  was  scattered  and  made  common,  so  common, 
that  a  copy  was  brought  to  me  (being  none  of  his  special 
friends),  before  Michaelmas.  And  yet  this  discourse  was  not 
printed  till  April,  1624.  Now  that  you  may  know  how  this 
happened,  I  shall  say  for  myself,  it  was  not  my  idleness,  nor 
my  unwillingness  to  right  both  myself  and  the  cause  against 
the  Jesuit  and  the  paper  which  he  had  spread,  that  occa- 
sioned this  delay.  For  I  had  then  most  honourable  wit- 
nesses, and  have  some  yet  living,  that  this  discourse  (such  as 
it  was  when  A.  C.  nibbled  at  it)  was  finished  long  before  I 
could  persuade  myself  to  let  it  come  into  public  view.  And 
this  was  caused  partly  by  my  own  backwardness  to  deal  with 
these  men,  whom  I  have  ever  observed  to  be  great  pretenders 
for  truth  and  unity,  but  yet  such  as  will  admit  neither, 
unless  they  and  their  faction  may  prevail  in  all,  as  if  no 
reformation  had  been  necessary ;  and  partly  because  there 
were  about  the  same  time  three  conferences  held  with  Fisher. 
Of  these,  this  was  the  third ;  and  could  not  therefore  con- 
veniently come  abroad  into  the  world,  till  the  two  former 
were  ready  to  lead  the  way ;  which  till  that  time  they  were 

And  this  is  in  part  the  reason  also,  why  this  tract  crept 
into  the  end  of  a  larger  work.  For  since  that  work  con- 
tained in  a  manner  the  substance  of  all  that  passed  in  the 
two  former  conferences,  and  that  this  third  in  divers  points 
concurred  with  them  and  depended  on  them;  I  could  not 
think  it  substantive  enough  to  stand  alone.  But  besides  this 

thereby,  his  intention  will  not  help  it.     me,  I  leave  to  the  indifferent  reader  of 
And  whether  the  copies  which  he  deli-     this  discourse  to  judge. 
vered  have  not  in  them  calumny  against 


affinity  between  the  conferences,  I  was  willing  to  have  it  pass 
as  silently  as  it  might,  at  the  end  of  another  work,  and  so 
perhaps  little  to  be  looked  after ;  because  I  could  not  hold  it 
worthy,  nor  can  I  yet,  of  that  great  duty  and  service  which 
I  owe  to  my  dear  mother  the  church  of  England. 

There  is  a  cause  also  why  it  looks  now  abroad  again  with 
alteration  and  addition  :  and  it  is  fit  I  should  give  your 
Majesty  an  account  of  that  too.  This  tract  was  first  printed 
in  the  year  1624.  And  in  the  year  1626,  another  Jesuit,  or 
the  same,  under  the  name  of  A.  C.,  printed  a  Relation  of  this 
conference,  and  therein  took  exceptions  to  some  particulars, 
and  endeavoured  to  confute  some  things  delivered  therein  by 
me.  Now  being  in  years,  and  unwilling  to  die  in  the  Jesuit's 
debt,  I  have  in  this  second  edition  done  as  much  for  him,  and 
somewhat  more.  For  he  did  but  skip  up  and  down,  and 
labour  to  pick  a  hole  here  and  there,  where  he  thought  he 
might  fasten ;  and  where  it  was  too  hard  for  him,  let  it  alone. 
But  I  have  gone  through  with  him,  and  I  hope  given  a  full 
confutation ;  or  at  least  such  a  bone  to  gnaw,  as  may  shake 
his  teeth,  if  he  look  not  to  it.  And  of  my  addition  to  this 
discourse,  this  is  the  cause ;  but  of  my  alteration  of  some 
things  in  it,  this :  A.  C.  his  curiosity  to  winnow  me  made 
me  in  a  more  curious  manner  fall  to  sifting  of  myself,  and 
that  which  had  formerly  passed  my  pen.  And  though  (I  bless 
God  for  it)  I  found  no  cause  to  alter  any  thing  that  belonged 
either  to  the  substance  or  course  of  the  conference,  yet 
somewhat  I  did  find  which  needed  better  and  clearer  expres- 
sion ;  and  that  I  have  altered,  well  knowing  I  must  expect 
curious  observers  on  all  hands. 

Now,  why  this  additional  answer  to  the  Relation  of  A.  C. 
came  no  sooner  forth,  hath  a  cause  too,  and  I  shall  truly 
represent  it.  A.  C.  his  Relation  of  the  Conference  was  set 
out  1 626.  I  knew  not  of  it  in  some  years  after.  For  it  was 
printed  among  divers  other  things  of  like  nature,  either  by 
Mr.  Fisher  himself,  or  his  friend  A.  C.  When  I  saw  it,  I 
read  it  over  carefully,  and  found  myself  not  a  little  wronged 
in  it;  but  the  church  of  England,  and  indeed  the  cause  of 
religion,  much  more.  I  was  before  this  time,  by  your 
Majesty's  great  grace  and  undeserved  favour,  made  dean  of 
your  Majesty's  chapel  royal,  and  a  counsellor  of  state,  and 


hereby,  as  the  occasions  of  those  times  were,  made  too  much 
a  stranger  to  my  books.  Yet  for  all  my  busy  employments, 
it  was  still  in  my  thoughts  to  give  A.  C.  an  answer.  But 
then  I  fell  into  a  most  dangerous  fever;  and  though  it 
pleased  God,  beyond  all  hope,  to  restore  me  to  health,  yet 
long  I  was  before  I  recovered  such  strength  as  might  enable 
me  to  undertake  such  a  service.  And  since  that  time  how  I 
have  been  detained,  and  in  a  manner  forced  upon  other  many, 
various  and  great  occasions,  your  Majesty  knows  best.  And 
how  of  late  I  have  been  used  by  the  scandalous  and  scurrilous 
pens  of  some  bitter  men,  (whom  I  heartily  beseech  God  to 
forgive,)  the  world  knows :  little  leisure  and  less  encourage- 
ment given  me  to  answer  a  Jesuit,  or  set  upon  other  services, 
while  I  am  under  the  prophet's  affliction,  f  between  the  mouth 
that  speaks  wickedness,  and  the  tongue  that  sets  forth  deceit, 
and  slander  me  as  thick  as  if  I  were  not  their  own  mother's 
son.  In  the  midst  of  these  libellous  outcries  against  me, 
some  divines  of  great  note  and  worth  in  the  church  came  to 
me,  one  by  one,  and  no  one  knowing  of  the  other's  coming,  (as 
to  me  they  protested,)  and  persuaded  with  me  to  reprint  this 
Conference  in  my  own  name.  This  they  thought  would  vin- 
dicate my  reputation,  were  it  generally  known  to  be  mine.  I 
confess  I  looked  round  about  these  men  and  their  motion ; 
and  at  last,  my  thoughts  working  much  upon  themselves,  I 
began  to  persuade  myself  that  I  had  been  too  long  diverted 
from  this  necessary  work  :  and  that  perhaps  there  might  be 
in  voce  hominum  tuba  Dei,  in  the  still  voice  of  men  the  loud 
trumpet  of  God,  which  sounds  many  ways,  sometimes  to  the 
ears  and  sometimes  to  the  hearts  of  men,  and  by  means 
which  they  think  not  of.  And  as  sSt.  Augustine  speaks,  a 
word  of  God  there  is,  quod  nunquam  tacet,  sed  non  semper  au~ 
ditur,  which  though  it  be  never  silent,  yet  is  not  always 
heard.  That  it  is  never  silent,  is  his  great  mercy ;  and  that 
it  is  not  always  heard,  is  not  the  least  of  our  misery.  Upon 
this  motion  I  took  time  to  deliberate ;  and  had  scarce  time 

f  Psalm  1.  19,  20.  astonishment,    yet    believed   him    not: 

g  S.  Aug.  Serai.  63.  de  Diversis,  c.  Luke   ii.    47.     And    the   Word    then 

10.     He  speaks  of  Christ  disputing  in  spake  to  them  by  a  means  they  thought 

the  temple  with  the  elders  of  the  Jews,  not    of,    namely,   per   Filium   Dei   in 

And   they  heard    Christ,  the  essential  puero,  by  the  Son  of  God  himself  under 

Word  of  the  Father,  with  admiration  to  the  vail  of  our  human  nature. 


for  that,  much  less  for  the  work.  Yet  at  last  to  every  of 
these  men  I  gave  this  answer  :  That  Mr.  Fisher,  or  A.  C.  for 
him,  had  been  busy  with  my  former  discourse,  and  that  I 
would  never  reprint  that,  unless  I  might  gain  time  enough  to 
answer  that  which  A.  C.  had  charged  afresh  both  upon  me 
and  the  cause.  While  my  thoughts  were  thus  at  work,  your 
Majesty  fell  upon  the  same  thing,  and  was  graciously  pleased 
not  to  command,  but  to  wish  me  to  reprint  this  Conference, 
and  in  mine  own  name ;  and  this  openly  at  the  council-table 
in  Michaelmas  term,  1637.  I  did  not  hold  it  fit  to  deny, 
having  in  all  the  course  of  my  service  obeyed  your  Majesty's 
honourable  and  just  motions  as  commands;  but  craved 
leave  to  shew  what  little  leisure  I  had  to  do  it,  and  what 
inconveniences  might  attend  upon  it.  When  this  did  not 
serve  to  excuse  me,  I  humbly  submitted  to  that,  which  I  hope 
was  God's  motion  in  your  Majesty's.  And  having  thus  laid 
all  that  concerns  this  discourse  before  your  gracious  and  most 
sacred  Majesty,  I  most  humbly  present  you  with  the  book 
itself,  which  as  I  heartily  pray  you  to  protect,  so  do  I  wholly 
submit  it  to  the  church  of  England,  with  my  prayers  for 
her  prosperity,  and  my  wishes  that  I  were  able  to  do  her 
better  service. 

I  have  thus  acquainted  your  Majesty  with  all  occasions, 
which  both  formerly  and  now  again  have  led  this  tract  into 
the  light ;  in  all  which  I  am  a  faithful  relater  of  all  passages, 
but  am  not  very  well  satisfied  who  is  now  my  adversary. 
Mr.  Fisher  was  at  the  conference  ;  since  that,  I  find  A.  C. 
at  the  print.  And  whether  these  be  two  or  but  one  Jesuit 
I  know  not,  since  scarce  one  amongst  them  goes  under  one 
name.  But  for  my  own  part  (and  the  error  is  not  great,  if  I 
mistake)  I  think  they  are  one,  and  that  one,  Mr.  Fisher. 
That  which  induces  me  to  think  so  is,  first,  the  great  inward- 
ness of  A.  C.  with  Mr.  Fisher,  which  is  so  great,  as  may  well 
be  thought  to  neighbour  upon  identity.  Secondly,  the  style 
of  A.  C.  is  so  like  Mr.  Fisher's,  that  I  doubt  it  was  but  one 
A.  C. p.  67.  and  the  same  hand  that  moved  the  pen.  Thirdly,  A.  C.  says 
expressly,  "  That  the  Jesuit  himself  made  the  relation  of  the 
first  conference  with  Dr.  White  :"  and  in  the  title-page  of  the 
work,  that  relation,  as  well  as  this,  is  said  to  be  made  by  A.  C. 
and  published  by  W.  I.;  therefore  A.  C.  and  the  Jesuit  are 


one  and  the  same  person,  or  else  one  of  these  places  hath  no 
truth  in  it. 

Now  if  it  be  Mr.  Fisher  himself,  under  the  name  of  A.  C., 
then  what  needs  these  h  words :  "  The  Jesuit  could  be  content 
to  let  pass  the  chaplain's  censure,  as  one  of  his  ordinary  per- 
secutions for  the  catholic  faith ;  but  A.  C.  thought  it  necessary 
for  the  common  cause  to  defend  the  sincerity  and  truth  of  his 
Relation,  and  the  truth  of  some  of  the  chief  heads  contained  in 
it  ?"  In  which  speech  give  me  leave  to  observe  to  your  sacred 
Majesty,  how  grievously  you  suffer  him  and  his  fellows  to  be 
persecuted  for  the  catholic  faith,  when  your  poor  subject  and 
servant  cannot  set  out  a  true  copy  of  a  conference  held  with 
the  Jesuit,  jussu  superiorum,  but  by  and  by  the  man  is  per- 
secuted. God  forbid  I  should  ever  offer  to  persuade  a  per- 
secution in  any  kind,  or  practise  it  in  the  least ;  for  to  my 
remembrance,  I  have  not  given  him  or  his  so  much  as  coarse 
language.  But  on  the  other  side,  God  forbid  too,  that  your 
Majesty  should  let  both  laws  and  discipline  sleep  for  fear  of 
the  name  of  persecution,  and  in  the  mean  time  let  Mr.  Fisher 
and  his  fellows  angle  in  all  parts  of  your  dominions  for  your 
subjects.  If  in  your  grace  and  goodness  you  will  spare  their 
persons,  yet  I  humbly  beseech  you,  see  to  it  that  they  be  not 
suffered  to  lay  either  their  wheels,  or  bait  their  hooks,  or  cast 
their  nets  in  every  stream,  lest  that  tentation  grow  both  too 
general  and  too  strong.  I  know  they  have  many  devices  to 
work  their  ends ;  but  if  they  will  needs  be  fishing,  let  them 
use  none  but  'lawful  nets.  Let  us  have  no  dissolving  of  oaths 
of  allegiance,  no  deposing,  no  killing  of  kings,  no  blowing 
up  of  states,  to  settle  quod  volumus,  that  which  fain  they 
would  have  in  the  church;  with  many  other  nets  as  dan- 
gerous as  these :  for  if  their  profession  of  religion  were  as 
good  as  they  pretend  it  is,  if  they  cannot  compass  it  by  good 
means,  I  am  sure  they  ought  not  to  attempt  it  by  bad.  For 
if  they  will  do  evil  that  good  may  come  thereof,  the  apostle 
tells  me,  k -their  damnation  is  just. 

Now  as  I  would  humbly  beseech  your  Majesty  to  keep  a 

h  Preface  to  the  Relation  of  this  Con-  have   greatest    cause   to   take  heed  of 

ference  by  A.  C.  them.    S.  August,  lib.  de  Fide  et  Oper. 

i  And   St.  Augustine    is    very    full  c.  17. 
against  the  use  of  mala  retia,  unlawful         k  Rom.  iii.  8. 
nets,  and  saith  the  fishermen  themselves 


serious  watch  upon  these  Fisher-men,  which  pretend  St.  Peter, 
but  fish  not  with  his  net ;  so  would  I  not  have  you  neglect 
another  sort  of  anglers  in  a  shallower  water.  For  they  have 
some  ill  nets  too.  And  if  they  may  spread  them  when  and 
where  they  will,  God  knows  what  may  become  of  it.  These 
have  not  so  strong  a  back  abroad  as  the  Romanists  have ; 
but  that  is  no  argument  to  suffer  them  to  increase.  They 
may  grow  to  equal  strength  with  number.  And  factious 
people  at  home,  of  what  sect  or  fond  opinion  soever  they  be, 
are  not  to  be  neglected  :  partly,  because  they  are  so  near  ; 
and  it  is  ever  a  dangerous  fire  that  begins  in  the  bedstraw : 
and  partly,  because  all  those  domestic  evils,  which  threaten 
a  rent  in  church  or  state,  are  with  far  more  safety  prevented 
by  wisdom  than  punished  by  justice.  And  would  men  con- 
sider it  right,  they  are  far  more  beholding  to  that  man  that 
keeps  them  from  falling,  than  to  him  that  takes  them  up, 
though  it  be  to  set  the  arm  or  the  leg  that  is  broken  in  the 

In  this  discourse  I  have  no  aim  to  displease  any,  nor  any 
hope  to  please  all.  If  I  can  help  on  to  truth  in  the  church, 
and  the  peace  of  the  church  together,  I  shall  be  glad,  be  it  in 
any  measure.  Nor  shall  I  spare  to  speak  necessary  truth,  out 
of  too  much  love  of  peace ;  nor  thrust  on  unnecessary  truth 
to  the  breach  of  that  peace,  which,  once  broken,  is  not  so  easily 
soldered  again.  And  if  for  necessary  truth's  sake  only,  any 
man  will  be  offended,  nay  take,  nay  snatch  at  that  offence 
which  is  not  given,  I  know  no  fence  for  that.  It  is  truth,  and 
I  must  tell  it :  it  is  the  gospel,  and  I  must  preach  it1.  And 
far  safer  it  is  in  this  case  to  bear  anger  from  men,  than  a  woe 
from  God.  And  where  the  foundations  of  faith  are  shaken,  be 
it  by  superstition  or  profaneness,  he  that  puts  not  to  his 
hand  as  firmly  as  he  can  to  support  them,  is  too  wary  and 
hath  more  care  of  himself  than  of  the  cause  of  Christ.  And 
it  is  a  wariness  that  brings  more  danger  in  the  end  than  it 
shuns.  For  the  angel  of  the  Lord  issued  out  a  curse  against  the 
inhabitants  of  Meroz,  because  they  came  not  to  help  the  Lord,  to 
help  the  Lord  against  the  mighty™.  I  know  it  is  a  great  ease 
to  let  every  thing  be  as  it  will,  and  every  man  believe  and  do 

1  i  Cor.  ix.  1 6.  m  Judges  v.  23. 


as  he  list :  but  whether  governors  in  state  or  church  do  their 
duty  therewhile  is  easily  seen,  since  this  is  an  effect  of  no  king 
in  Israel n. 

The  church  of  Christ  upon  earth  may  be  compared  to  a 
hive  of  bees,  and  that  can  be  nowhere  so  steadily  placed  in 
this  world,  but  it  will  be  in  some  danger.  And  men  that  care 
neither  for  the  hive  nor  the  bees,  have  yet  a  great  mind  to 
the  honey ;  and  having  once  tasted  the  sweet  of  the  church's 
maintenance,  swallow  that  for  honey,  which  one  day  will  be 
more  bitter  than  gall  in  their  bowels.  Now  the  king  and  the 
priest,  more  than  any  other,  are  bound  to  look  to  the  in- 
tegrity of  the  church  in  doctrine  and  manners,  and  that  in 
the  first  place ;  for  that  is  by  far  the  best  honey  in  the  hive. 
But  in  the  second  place,  they  must  be  careful  of  the  church's 
maintenance  too,  else  the  bees  shall  make  honey  for  others, 
and  have  none  left  for  their  own  necessary  sustenance,  and 
then  all  is  lost.  For  we  see  it  in  daily  and  common  use,  that 
the  honey  is  not  taken  from  the  bees,  but  they  are  destroyed 
first.  Now  in  this  great  and  busy  work,  the  king  and  the 
priest  must  not  fear  to  put  their  hands  to  the  hive,  though 
they  be  sure  to  be  stung ;  and  stung  by  the  bees  whose  hive 
and  house  they  preserve.  It  was  king  David's  case,  (God 
grant  it  be  never  yours:)  They  came  about  me,  saith  the 
Psalmist,  °  like  lees.  This  was  hard  usage  enough,  yet  some 
profit,  some  honey  might  thus  be  gotten  in  the  end :  and 
that  is  the  king's  case.  But  when  it  comes  to  the  priest,  the 
case  is  altered :  they  come  about  him  like  wasps,  or  like  hor- 
nets rather,  all  sting  and  no  honey  there.  And  all  this  many 
times  for  no  offence,  nay  sometimes  for  service  done  them, 
would  they  see  it.  But  you  know  who  said,  Behold,  I  come 
shortly ;  and  my  reward  is  with  me,  to  give  to  every  man  accord- 
ing as  Ms  works  shall  beP.  And  he  himself  is  so  q  exceeding  great 
a  reward,  as  that  the  manifold  stings  which  are  in  the  world, 
howsoever  they  smart  here,  are  nothing  when  they  are  pressed 
out  with  that  exceeding  weight  of  glory  which  shall  be  re- 

n  Judges  xvii.  6.  descentia.  Calv.  in  Psal.  cxviii. 

o  Psal.  cxviii.  1 2. — Apum  similitudine         P  Revel,  xxii.  12. 
ardorem  notat  vesanum;  non  est  enim         n  Gen.  xv.  i. 
in  illis  multum  roboris,  sed  mira  excan-         r  Rom.  viii.  18. 


Now  one  thing  more  let  me  be  bold  to  observe  to  your 
Majesty  in  particular,  concerning  your  great  charge,  the 
church  of  England.  It  is  in  a  hard  condition.  She  pro- 
fesses the  ancient  catholic  faith,  and  yet  the  Romanist  con- 
demns her  of  novelty  in  her  doctrine.  She  practises  church 
government,  as  it  hath  been  in  use  in  all  ages  and  all  places, 
where  the  church  of  Christ  hath  taken  any  rooting,  both  in 
and  ever  since  the  apostles'  times  ;  and  yet  the  separatist  con- 
demns her  for  antichristianism  in  her  discipline.  The  plain 
truth  is,  she  is  between  these  two  factions,  as  between  two 
millstones ;  and  unless  your  Majesty  look  to  it,  to  whose  trust 
she  is  committed,  she  will  be  ground  to  powder,  to  an  irre- 
parable both  dishonour  and  loss  to  this  kingdom.  And  it  is 
very  remarkable,  that  while  both  these  press  hard  upon  the 
church  of  England,  both  of  them  cry  out  upon  persecution, 
like  froward  children,  which  scratch,  and  kick,  and  bite,  and 
yet  cry  out  all  the  while  as  if  themselves  were  killed.  Now  to 
the  Romanist  I  shall  say  this ;  The  errors  of  the  church  of 
Rome  are  grown  now  (many  of  them)  very  old;  and  when 
errors  are  grown  by  age  and  continuance  to  strength,  they 
which  speak  for  the  truth,  though  it  be  far  older,  are  ordi- 
narily challenged  for  the  bringers  in  of  new  opinions.  And 
there  is  no  greater  absurdity  stirring  this  day  in  Christendom, 
than  that  the  reformation  of  an  old  corrupted  church,  will  we, 
nill  we,  must  be  taken  for  the  building  of  a  new.  And  were 
not  this  so,  we  should  never  be  troubled  with  that  idle  and 
impertinent  question  of  theirs,  Where  was  your  church  be- 
fore Luther?  for  it  was  just  there,  where  theirs  is  now.  S0ne 
and  the  same  church  still,  no  doubt  of  that.  One  in  substance, 
but  not  one  in  condition  of  state  and  purity ;  their  part  of 
the  same  church  remaining  in  corruption,  and  our  part  of  the 
same  church  under  reformation.  The  same  Naaman,  and  he 
a  Syrian  still,  but  leprous  with  them,  and  cleansed  with  us ; 
the  same  man  still.  And  for  the  separatist,  and  him  that  lays 

s  "  There  is  no  other  difference  he-  field,    now  of  Duresm.,  in  the  letters 

tween  us  and  Rome,  than  betwixt   a  printed  by  the  bp,  of  Exeter,  in  this 

church  miserably  corrupted,  and  happily  treatise    called   the    Reconciler,    p.  68. 

purged,"  &c.  Jos.  Hall,    bp.  of  Exon,  And  Dr.  Field,  in  this  Appendix  to  the 

in  his   Apologetical   Advertisement   to  third  part,  cap.  2,  where  he  cites  Calvin 

the  Reader,  p.  192  ;    approved  by  Tho.  to  the  same  purpose,  lib.iv.  Inst.  cap.  2. 

Morton,  bp.  then  of  Coventry  and  Lich-  §.  1 1 . 


his  grounds  for  separation  or  change  of  discipline,  though  all 
he  says  or  can  say  be  in  truth  of  divinity  and  among  learned 
men  little  better  than  ridiculous ;  yet  since  these  fond  opin- 
ions have  gained  some  ground  among  your  people,  to  such 
among  them  as  are  wilfully  set  to  follow  their  blind  guides 
through  thick  and  thin,  till  Hhey  fall  into  the  ditch  together, 
I  shall  say  nothing :  but  for  so  many  of  them  as  mean  well, 
and  are  only  misled  by  artifice  and  cunning,  concerning  them 
I  shall  say  thus  much  only,  "  They  are  bells  of  passing  good 
metal,  and  tuneable  enough  of  themselves,  and  in  their  own 
disposition ;  and  a  world  of  pity  it  is  that  they  are  rung  so 
miserably  out  of  tune  as  they  are,  by  them  which  have  gotten 
power  in  and  over  their  consciences.  And  for  this  there  is 
yet  remedy  enough ;  but  how  long  there  will  be,  I  know  not. 

Much  talking  there  is  (bragging,  your  Majesty  may  call  it) 
on  both  sides ;  and  when  they  are  in  their  ruff,  they  both 
exceed  all  moderation  and  truth  too  ;  so  far,  till  both  lips  and 
pens  open  for  all  the  world,  like  a  purse  without  money; 
nothing  comes  out  of  this,  and  that  which  is  worth  nothing  out 
of  them.  And  yet  this  nothing  is  made  so  great,  as  if  the 
salvation  of  souls,  that  great  work  of  the  Redeemer  of  the 
world  the  Son  of  God,  could  not  be  effected  without  it.  And 
while  the  one  faction  cries  up  the  church  above  the  scripture, 
and  the  other  the  scripture  to  the  neglect  and  contempt  of  the 
church,  which  the  scripture  itself  teaches  men  both  to  honour 
and  obey,  they  have  so  far  endangered  the  belief  of  the  one 
and  the  authority  of  the  other,  as  that  neither  hath  its  due 
from  a  great  part  of  men;  whereas,  according  to  Christ's 
institution,  the  scripture,  where  it  is  plain,  should  guide  the 
church,  and  the  church,  where  there  is  doubt  or  difficulty, 
should  expound  the  scripture  ;  yet  so  as  neither  the  scripture 
should  be  forced,  nor  the  church  so  bound  up,  as  that  upon 
just  and  further  evidence  she  may  not  revise  that  which  in 
any  case  hath  slipt  by  her  What  success  this  great  dis- 
temper, caused  by  the  collision  of  two  such  factions,  may 
have,  I  know  not,  I  cannot  prophesy.  This  I  know,  that  the 
use  which  wise  men  should  make  of  other  men's  falls  is  not 
to  fall  with  them ;  and  the  use  which  pious  and  religious  men 

t  JMatth.  xv.  14. 


should  make  of  these  great  flaws  in  Christianity,  is  not  to 
join  with  them  that  make  them,  nor  to  help  to  dislocate  those 
main  bones  in  the  body,  which  being  once  put  out  of  joint 
will  not  easily  be  set  again.  And  though  I  cannot  prophesy, 
yet  I  fear  that  atheism  and  irreligion  gather  strength,  while 
the  truth  is  thus  weakened  by  an  unworthy  way  of  contend- 
ing for  it.  And  while  they  thus  contend,  neither  part  con- 
sider that  they  are  in  a  way  to  induce  upon  themselves  and 
others  that  contrary  extreme,  which  they  seem  most  both  to 
fear  and  oppose. 

Besides,  this  I  have  ever  observed,  that  many  rigid  profes- 
sors have  turned  Roman  catholics,  and  in  that  turn  have  been 
more  jesuited  than  any  other ;  and  such  Romanists  as  have 
changed  from  them  have  for  the  most  part  quite  leaped  over 
the  mean,  and  been  as  rigid  the  other  way  as  extremity 
itself.  And  this,  if  there  be  not  both  grace  and  wisdom  to 
govern  it,  is  a  very  natural  motion;  for  a  man  is  apt  to 
think  he  can  never  run  far  enough  from  that  which  he  once 
begins  to  hate,  and  doth  not  consider  therewhile,  that  where 
religion  corrupted  is  the  thing  he  hates,  a  fallacy  may  easily 
be  put  upon  him  ;  for  he  ought  to  hate  the  corruption  which 
depraves  religion,  and  to  run  from  it ;  but  from  no  part  of 
religion  itself,  which  he  ought  to  love  and  reverence,  ought  he 
to  depart.  And  this  I  have  observed  further,  that  no  one 
thing  hath  made  conscientious  men  more  wavering  in  their 
own  minds,  or  more  apt  and  easy  to  be  drawn  aside  from  the 
sincerity  of  religion  professed  in  the  church  of  England,  than 
the  want  of  uniform  and  decent  order  in  too  many  churches 
of  the  kingdom.  And  the  Romanists  have  been  apt  to  say, 
The  houses  of  God  could  not  be  suffered  to  lie  so  nastily, 
(as  in  some  places  they  have  done,)  were  the  true  worship  of 
God  observed  in  them,  or  did  the  people  think  that  such  it 
were.  It  is  true  the  inward  worship  of  the  heart  is  the 
great  service  of  God,  and  no  service  acceptable  without  it ; 
but  the  external  worship  of  God  in  his  church  is  the  great 
witness  to  the  world  that  our  heart  stands  right  in  that  ser- 
vice of  God :  take  this  away,  or  bring  it  into  contempt,  and 
what  light  is  there  left  to  shine  before  men,  that  they  may  see 
our  devotion,  and  glorify  our  Father  which  is  in  heaven  ?  And 
to  deal  clearly  with  your  Majesty,  these  thoughts  are  they, 


and  no  other,  which  have  made  me  labour  so  much  as  I  have 
done  for  decency  and  an  orderly  settlement  of  the  external 
worship  of  God  in  the  church  ;  for  of  that  which  is  inward 
there  can  be  no  witness  among  men,  nor  no  example  for  men. 
Now  no  external  action  in  the  world  can  be  uniform  without 
some  ceremonies ;  and  these  in  religion,  the  ancienter  they 
be  the  better,  so  they  may  fit  time  and  place:  too  many 
over-burden  the  service  of  God,  and  too  few  leave  it  naked. 
And  scarce  any  thing  hath  hurt  religion  more  in  these  broken 
times  than  an  opinion  in  too  many  men,  that  because  Rome  had 
thrust  some  unnecessary  and  many  superstitious  ceremonies 
upon  the  church,  therefore  the  Reformation  must  have  none 
at  all;  not  considering  therewhile,  that  ceremonies  are  the 
hedge  that  fence  the  substance  of  religion  from  all  the  indig- 
nities which  profaneness  and  sacrilege  too  commonly  put  upon 
it.  And  a  great  weakness  it  is  not  to  see  the  strength  which 
ceremonies  (things  weak  enough  in  themselves,  God  knows) 
add  even  to  religion  itself;  but  a  far  greater  to  see  it,  and 
yet  to  cry  them  down,  all,  and  without  choice,  by  which  their 
most  hated  adversaries  climbed  up,  and  could  not  cry  up 
themselves  and  their  cause  as  they  do  but  by  them.  And 
divines,  of  all  the  rest,  might  learn  and  teach  this  wisdom  if 
they  would,  since  they  see  all  other  professions  which  help  to 
bear  down  their  ceremonies,  keep  up  their  own  therewhile, 
and  that  to  the  highest. 

I  have  been  too  bold  to  detain  your  Majesty  so  long ;  but 
my  grief  to  see  Christendom  bleeding  in  dissension,  and,  which 
is  worse,  triumphing  in  her  own  blood,  and  most  angry  with 
them  that  would  study  her  peace,  hath  thus  transported  me. 
For  truly  it  cannot  but  grieve  any  man  that  hath  bowels,  to 
see  all  men  seeking,  but  as  St.  Paul  foretold  u,  their  own 
things,  and  not  the  things  which  are  Jesus  Christ's;  sua, 
their  own  surely,  for  the  gospel  of  Christ  hath  nothing  to  do 
with  them ;  and  to  see  religion,  so  much,  so  zealously  pre- 
tended and  called  upon,  made  but  the  stalking-horse  to  shoot 
at  other  fowl,  upon  which  their  aim  is  set :  in  the  mean  time,  as 
if  all  were  truth  and  holiness  itself,  no  salvation  must  be  pos- 
sible, did  it  lie  at  their  mercy,  but  in  the  communion  of  the 

«  Phil.  ii.  21. 


one,  and  in  the  conventicles  of  the  other.  As  if  either  of  these 
now  were,  as  the  Donatists  of  old  reputed  themselves,  the  only 
men  in  whom  Christ  at  his  coming  to  judgment  should  find 
faith.  "No,"  saith  x  St.  Augustine,  and  so  say  I  with  him, 
"Da  veniam,  non  credimus ;  pardon  us,  I  pray,  we  cannot 
believe  it."  The  catholic  church  of  Christ  is  neither  Rome 
nor  a  conventicle.  Out  of  that  there  is  no  salvation,  I  easily 
confess  it ;  but  out  of  Rome  there  is,  and  out  of  a  con- 
venticle too :  salvation  is  not  shut  up  into  such  a  narrow  con- 
clave. In  this  ensuing  discourse  therefore  I  have  endea- 
voured to  lay  open  those  wider  gates  of  the  catholic  church, 
confined  to  no  age,  time,  or  place  ;  nor  knowing  any  bounds, 
but  that  faith,  which  was  once  (and  but  once  for  all)  delivered 
to  the  saints  Y.  And  in  my  pursuit  of  this  way  I  have 
searched  after,  and  delivered  with  a  single  heart,  that  truth 
which  I  profess.  In  the  publishing  whereof,  I  have  obeyed 
your  Majesty,  discharged  my  duty  to  my  power  to  the 
church  of  England,  z  given  account  of  the  hope  that  is  in  me, 
and  so  testified  to  the  world  that  faith  in  which  I  have  lived, 
and  by  God's  blessing  and  favour  purpose  to  die  ;  but  till 
death  shall  most  unfeignedly  remain, 

Your  Majesty^s  most  faithful  subject, 

And  most  humble  and  obliged  servant, 

W.  CANT. 

*  S.August.  Epist.  48.  y  Jude  3.  z  i  Pet.  iii.  15. 








$.  The  occasion  of  this  conference  was — 
23.  rilHE  occasion  of  this  third  conference  you  should  know  Sect.  i. 

A  sufficiently.  You  were  an  actor  in  it,  as  well  as  in 
two  other.  Whether  you  have  related  the  two  former  truly, 
appears  by  Dr.  White  the  late  reverend  lord  bishop  of  Ely 
his  relation  or  exposition  of  them.  I  was  present  at  none 
but  this  third ;  of  which  I  here  give  the  church  an  account. 
But  of  this  third,  whether  that  were  the  cause  which  you 
allege,  I  cannot  tell.  You  say, 

dp.  It  was  observed,  that  in  the  second  conference  all  the 
speech  was  about  particular  matters,  little  or  none  about 
a  continual,  infallible,  visible  church ;  which  was  the  chief 
and  only  point  in  which  a  certain  lady  required  satis- 
faction ;  as  having  formerly  settled  in  her  mind,  that  it 
was  not  for  her,  or  any  other  unlearned  persons,  to  take 
upon  them  to  judge  of  particulars,  without  depending 
upon  the  judgment  of  the  true  church. 

33*  The  opinion  of  that  honourable  person  in  this  was  never  Sect.  2. 
opened  to  me.     And  it  is  very  fit  the  people  should  look  to 
the  judgment  of  the  church,  before  they  be  too  busy  with 

2  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  2,3.  particulars.  But  yet  neither  scripture3,  nor  any  good  author- 
ity, denies  them  some  moderate  use  of  their  own  under- 
standing and  judgment,  especially  in  things  familiar  and 
evident ;  which  even  ordinary  capacities  may  as  easily  under- 
stand as  readb.  And  therefore  some  particulars  a  Christian 
may  judge  without  depending. 

Jp,  This  lady  therefore  having  heard  it  granted  in  the  first 
conference,  that  there  must  be  a  continual  visible  com- 
pany ever  since  Christ,  teaching  unchanged  doctrine  in  all 
fundamental  points,  that  is,  points  necessary  to  salvation, 
desired  to  hear  this  confirmed,  and  proof  brought  which 
was  that  continual,  infallible,  visible  church,  in  which  one 
may,  and  out  of  which  one  cannot,  attain  salvation.  And 
therefore,  having  appointed  a  time  of  meeting  between  a 
23.  and  me,  and  thereupon  having  sent  for  the  2$.  and  me, 
before  the  33.  came,  the  lady,  and  a  friend  of  hers,  came 
first  to  the  room  where  I  was,  and  debated  before  me  the 
aforesaid  question ;  and  not  doubting  of  the  first  part, 
to  wit,  that  there  must  be  a  continual  visible  church,  as 
they  had  heard  granted  by  D.  White  and  L.  K.,  &c. 
Sect.  3.  I. — 23*  What  D.  White  and  L.  K.  granted,  I  heard  not : 

but  I  think  both  granted  a  continual  and  a  visible  church ; 
neither  of  them  an  infallible,  at  least  in  your  sense.  And 
yourself,  in  this  relation,  speak  distractedly :  for  in  these  few 
lines  from  the  beginning  hither,  twice  you  add  infallible 
between  continual  and  visible,  and  twice  you  leave  it  out. 
But  this  concerns  D.  W.,  and  he  hath  answered  it. 
A. C. p. 42.  II. — Here  A.  C.  steps  in,  and  says,  "The  Jesuit  did  not 
speak  distractedly,  but  most  advisedly :  for  (saith  he)  where 
he  relates  what  D.  White  or  L.  K.  granted,  he  leaves  out  the 
word  infallible,  because  they  granted  it  not;  but  where  he 
speaks  of  the  lady,  there  he  adds  it,  because  the  Jesuit  knew 

a  I  Cor.  x.  15.  Et  Sidvoia  aTrb  rov  fiiavosiv,  i.  e.  ab  eo 

b  Quis  non  sine  ullo  magistro,  aut  quod  considerat,  et  discernit :  quia  de- 

interprete  ex   se  facile   cognoscat,   &c.  cernit  inter  verum  et  falsum.    Damasc. 

Novat.  de  Trin.  c.  23. — Et  loquitur  de  lib.  ii.  Fid.  Orth.  c.  22. 

mysterio  passionis  Christi :    Dijudicare  And  A.  C.  himself,  p.  41,  denies  not 

est  mensurare,  &c.;  unde  et  mens  dici-  all  judgment  to  private  men  ;  but  says, 

tur  a  metiendo.    Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  79.  a  9  "  They  are  not  so  to   rely  absolutely 

ad  4.    To  what  end  then  is  a  mind  and  upon  their  private  judgment,  as  to  ad- 

aii  understanding  given  a  man,  if  he  venture    salvation    upon    it   alone,    or 

n  ay  not  apply  it  to  measure  truth  ? —  chiefly  ;"  which  no  man  will  deny. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  3 

it  was  an  infallible  church  which  she  sought  to  rely  upon."  Sect.  3. 
How  far  the  catholic  militant  church  of  Christ  is  infallible,  is 
no  dispute  for  this  place,  though  you  shall  find  it  after.  But 
sure  the  Jesuit  did  not  speak  most  advisedly,  nor  A.  C. 
neither,  nor  the  lady  herself,  if  she  said  she  desired  to  rely 
upon  an  infallible  church.  For  an  infallible  church  denotes 
a  particular  church,  in  that  it  is  set  in  opposition  to  some 
other  particular  church  that  is  not  infallible.  Now  I  for  ray 
part  do  not  know  what  that  lady  desired  to  rely  upon.  This 
I  know :  if  she  desired  such  a  particular  church,  neither  this 
Jesuit,  nor  any  other,  is  able  to  shew  it  her ;  no,  not  Bellar- 
mine  himself,  though  of  very  great  ability  to  make  good  any 
truth  which  he  undertakes  for  the  church  of  Rome.  cBut 
no  strength  can  uphold  an  error  against  truth,  where  truth 
hath  an  able  defendant.  Now  where  Bellarmine  sets  himself 
purposely  to  make  this  good,  "dThat  the  particular  church  of 
Rome  cannot  err  in  matter  of  faith ;"  out  of  which  it  follows, 
that  there  may  be  found  a  particular  infallible  church ;  you 
shall  see  what  he  is  able  to  perform. 

III. —  i.  First  then,  after  he  hath  distinguished,  to  express 
his  meaning,  in  what  sense  the  particular  church  of  Rome 
cannot  err  in  things  which  are  de  fide,  of  the  faith,  he  tells 
us,  this  firmitude  is,  because  the  see  apostolic  is  fixed  there. 
And  this,  he  saith,  is  most  true  :  eand  for  proof  of  it,  he 
brings  three  Fathers  to  justify  it. 

(r.)  The  first,  St.  Cyprian,  f whose  words  are,  that  the 
Romans  are  such  as  to  whom  perfidia  cannot  have  access. 
Now  perfidia  can  hardly  stand  for  error  in  faith,  or  for  mis- 
belief; but  it  properly  signifies  malicious  falsehood  in  matter 
of  trust  and  action ;  not  error  in  faith,  but  in  fact,  against 
the  discipline  and  government  of  the  church.  And  why  may 
it  not  here  have  this  meaning  in  St.  Cyprian. 

IV. — For  the  story  there,  it  is  this,  sin  the  year  255  there 
was  a  council  in  Carthage  in  the  cause  of  two  schismatics, 

c  Veritas  vincat  necesse  est,  sive  ne-  c  Ibid.  §.  2. 

gantem,  sive  confitentem,  &c.    S.  Aug.  f  Navigare   audent  ad   Petri  cathe- 

Epist.  174. —  Occultari  potest  ad  tern-  dram,  et  ecclesiam  principalem,  &c.  nee 

pus  veritas,  vinci  non  potest.    S.  Aug.  cogitare  eos  esse  Romanos,  ad  quos  per- 

in  Psal.  61.  fidia  hahere  11011  potest  accessum.    Cy- 

d  L.  iv.  de  Rom.  Pont.  cap.  4.  §.  r.  prian.  lib.  i.  epist.  3. 

Roniana  particular^  ecclesia  non  potest  S  Binnii  Concil.  torn.  i.  p.  152.  edit, 

errare  in  fide.  Paris.  1636.    Baron.  Annal.  253—255. 

B  2 

4  ArcJibisJiap  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  Felicissimus  and  Novatian,  about  restoring  of  them  to  the 
communion  of  the  church,  which  had  lapsed,  in  time  of  danger, 
from  Christianity  to  idolatry.  Felicissimus  would  admit  all, 
even  without  penance ;  and  Novatian  would  admit  none,  no 
not  after  penance.  The  Fathers,  forty-two  in  number,  went,  as 
the  truth  led  them,  between  both  extremes.  To  this  council 
came  Privatus,  a  known  heretic,  but  was  not  admitted,  be- 
cause he  was  formerly  excommunicated,  and  often  condemned. 
Hereupon  he  gathers  his  complices  together,  and  chooses  one 
Fortunatus  (who  was  formerly  condemned  as  well  as  himself) 
bishop  of  Carthage,  and  set  him  up  against  St.  Cyprian.  This 
done,  Felicissimus  and  his  fellows  haste  to  Rome,  with  letters 
testimonial  from  their  own  party,  and  pretend  that  twenty- 
five  bishops  concurred  with  them ;  and  their  desire  was,  to 
be  received  into  the  communion  of  the  Roman  church,  and 
to  have  their  new  bishop  acknowledged.  Cornelius,  then 
pope,  though  their  haste  had  now  prevented  St.  Cyprian^s 
letters,  having  formerly  heard  from  him  both  of  them  and 
their  schism  in  Afric,  would  neither  hear  them,  nor  receive 
their  letters.  They  grew  insolent  and  furious,  (the  ordinary 
way  that  schismatics  take.)  Upon  this  Cornelius  writes  to 
St.  Cyprian ;  and  St.  Cyprian,  in  this  epistle,  gives  Cornelius 
thanks  for  refusing  these  African  fugitives,  declares  their 
schism  and  wickedness  at  large,  and  encourages  him,  and  all 
bishops,  to  maintain  the  ecclesiastical  discipline  and  censures 
against  any  the  boldest  threatenings  of  wicked  schismatics. 
This  is  the  story ;  and  in  this  is  the  passage  here  urged  by 
Bellarmine.  Now  I  would  fain  know  why  perfidia  (all  circum- 
stances considered)  may  not  stand  here  in  its  proper  sense, 
for  cunning  and  perfidious  dealing ;  which  these  men,  having 
practised  at  Carthage,  thought  now  to  obtrude  upon  the 
bishop  of  Rome  also,  but  that  he  was  wary  enough  not  to  be 
overreached  by  busy  schismatics. 

V.  —  (2.)  Secondly,  let  it  be  granted,  that  perfidia  doth 
signify  here  error  in  faith  and  doctrine.  For  I  will  not  deny 
but  that  among  the  African  writers  (and  especially  St. 
Cyprian)  it  is  sometimes  so  used;  and  therefore  here  perhaps. 
But  then  this  privilege,  of  not  erring  dangerously  in  the  faith, 
was  not  made  over  absolutely  to  the  Romans,  that  are  such 
by  birth  and  dwelling  only ;  but  to  the  Romans,  qua  tales,  as 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  5 

they  were  such  as  those  first  were,  whose  faith  was  famous  Sect. 
through  the  world,  and  as  long  as  they  continued  such ;  which 
at  that  time  it  seems  they  did.  And  so  St.  Cyprian's  words 
seem  to  import,  "  eos  esse  Romanos,"  that  the  Romans  then, 
under  pope  Cornelius,  were  such  as  the  h apostle  spake  of; 
and  therefore  to  whom,  at  that  time,  (or  any  time,  they  still 
remaining  such,)  perfidious  misbelief  could  not  be  welcome ; 
or  rather,  indeed,  perfidious  misbelievers  or  schismatics  could 
not  be  welcome.  For  this  very  phrase,  perfidia  non  potest 
habere  accessum,  directs  us  to  understand  the  word  in  a  con- 
crete sense :  "  Perfidiousness  could  not  get  access ;"  that  is, 
such  perfidious  persons,  excommunicated  out  of  other  churches, 
were  not  likely  to  get  access  at  Rome,  or  to  find  admittance 
into  their  communion.  It  is  but  a  metonymy  of  speech,  the 
adjunct  for  the  subject;  a  thing  very  usual  even  in  'elegant 
authors,  and  much  more  in  later  times,  as  in  St.  Cyprian's, 
when  the  Latin  language  was  grown  rougher.  Now,  if  it  be 
thus  understood  (I  say,  in  the  concrete),  then  it  is  plain  that 
St.  Cyprian  did  not  intend  by  these  words  to  exempt  the 
Romans  from  possibility  of  error,  but  to  brand  his  adversaries 
with  a  title  due  to  their  merit,  calling  them  perfidious,  that 
is,  such  as  had  betrayed  or  perverted  the  faith.  Neither  can 
we  lose  by  this  construction,  as  will  appear  at  after. 

VI. — (3.)  But  thirdly;  when  all  is  done,  what  if  it  be  no  more 
than  a  rhetorical  excess  of  speech ;  perfidia  non  potest,  for  non 
facile  potest ;  it  cannot,  that  is,  it  cannot  easily  ?  Or  what  if 
St.  Cyprian  do  but  laudando  prcecipere,  k  by  commending  them 
to  be  such,  instruct  them  that  such  indeed  they  ought  to  be, 
to  whom  perfidiousness  should  not  get  access  ?  Men  are  very 
bountiful  of  their  compliments  sometimes,  ^ynesius  writing 
to  Theophilus  of  Alexandria  begins  thus :  'Eyo>  KOL  ^o^Aojucu, 
KCU  avdyK-q  juot  0eta,  &c.  I  both  will,  and  a  divine  necessity  lies 
upon  me,  to  esteem  it  a  law,  whatsoever  that  throne  (meaning 
his  of  Alexandria)  shall  determine.  Nay,  the  word  is  0e<nn- 
£e4z>,  and  that  signifies  to  determine  like  an  oracle,  or  as  in 
God's  stead.  Now  I  hope  you  will  say,  this  is  not  to  be 

h  Rom.  i.  8.  tus  amictn  omuls  Honos.    Nullos  comi- 

1    Ego  tibi   istam    scelestam,   scelus,  tata  est  purpura/asces.    Lucan.  lib.  ii. 
linguam  abscindam.    Plaut.  Amphit.—         k   Nee   eogitare  eos   esse   Romanes, 

Ex  hac  enim  parte  pudor  pugnat,  illinc  quorum  fides  apostolo  praedicarite,  &c. 
petulanlia,&.c.  Cic. — Latuit  plebeio  tec-         1  Epist.  67. 


6  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  taken  dogmatically,  it  is  but  the  epistler's  courtesy  only. 
And  why  not  the  like  here?  For  the  haste  which  these 
schismatics  made  to  Rome  prevented  St.  Cyprian^s  letters : 
yet  Cornelius,  very  careful  of  both  the  truth  and  peace  of  the 
church,  would  neither  hear  them,  nor  receive  their  letters, 
mtill  he  had  written  to  St.  Cyprian.  Now  this  epistle  is  St. 
Cyprian's  answer  to  Cornelius,  in  which  he  informs  him  of  the 
whole  truth ;  and  withal  gives  him  thanks  for  refusing  to 
hear  these  African  fugitives.  In  which  fair  way  of  returning 
his  thanks,  if  he  make  an  honourable  mention  of  the  Romans 
and  their  faith,  with  a  little  dash  of  rhetoric,  even  to  a  non 
potest,  for  a  non  facile  potest,  it  is  no  great  wonder. 

VII. — But  take  which  answer  you  will  of  the  three,  this  is 
plain,  that  St.  Cyprian  had  no  meaning  to  assert  the  unerring 
infallibility  of  either  pope  or  church  of  Rome.  For  this  is 
more  than  manifest,  by  the  contestation  which  after  happened 
between  St.  Cyprian  and  pope  Stephen,  about  the  rebap- 
tization  of  those  that  were  baptized  by  heretics;  for  nhe 
saith  expressly,  that  "  pope  Stephen  did  then  not  only 
maintain  an  error,  but  the  very  cause  of  heretics ;  and  that 
against  Christians  and  the  very  church  of  God."  °And  after 
this  he  chargeth  him  with  obstinacy  and  presumption.  I 
hope  this  is  plain  enough  to  shew,  that  St.  Cyprian  had  no 
great  opinion  of  the  Roman  infallibility  :  or  if  he  had  it  when 
he  writ  to  Cornelius,  certainly  he  had  changed  it  when  he 
wrote  against  Stephen.  But  I  think  it  was  no  change ;  and 
that  when  he  wrote  to  Cornelius,  it  was  rhetoric,  and  no 

VIII. — Now  if  any  man  shall  say  that,  in  this  point  of 
rebaptization,  St.  Cyprian  himself  was  in  the  wrong  opinion, 
and  pope  Stephen  in  the  right,  I  easily  grant  that ;  but  yet 
that  error  of  his  takes  not  off  his  judgment,  what  he  thought 
of  the  papal  or  Roman  infallibility  in  those  times.  For  though 

m  For  so  St.  Cyprian  begins  his  epi-  ad   Pompeium   contra  Epist.   Stephani 

stle  to  Cornelius;  Legi  literas  tuas,  fra-  edit,  per  Erasmum,  Basil,  p.  327. 

ter,  &c.      And  after:    Sed  enim  lecta  o   Stephani  fratris   nostri  obstinatio 

alia  epistola  tua,  frater,  &c.   S.Cyprian,  dura.   Ibid.  p.  329.     And  it  would  be 

lib.  i.  epist.  3.  marked  by  the  Jesuit   and  1m  A.  C. 

n  Stephanus  frater  noster  haeretico-  that  still  it  is  Stephani  fratris  nostri, 

rum  causain  contra  Christianos,  et  con-  and    not    capitis,    or    summi    pastoris 

tra  ecclesiam  Dei  asserere  conatur.  Cypr.  nostri. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  7 

afterwards  P  St.  Cyprian's  opinion  was  condemned  in  a  council  Sect.  3. 
at  Rome  under  Cornelius,  and  after  that  by  pope  Stephen, 
and  after  both,  in  the  first  q  council  of  Carthage ;  yet  no  one 
word  is  there  in  that  council  which  mentions  this  as  an  error, 
that  he  thought  pope  Stephen  might  err  in  the  faith,  while 
he  proclaimed  he  did  so.  In  which,  though  the  particular 
censure  which  he  passed  on  pope  Stephen  was  erroneous,  (for 
Stephen  erred  not  in  that,)  yet  the  general  which  results  from 
it  (namely,  that  for  all  his  being  in  the  popedom,  he  might 
err)  is  most  true. 

IX. — 2.  The  second  Father  which  Bellarmine  cites  is 
St.  Jerome:  his  words  are,  "rThe  Roman  faith,  commended 
by  the  apostle,  admits  not  such  prcestigias,  deceits,  and  delu- 
sions into  it,  though  an  angel  should  preach  it  otherwise  than 
it  was  preached  at  first,  (and)  being  armed  and  fenced  by 
St.  Paul's  authority,  cannot  be  changed."  Where,  first,  I  will 
not  doubt  but  that  St.  Jerome  speaks  here  of  the  faith ;  for 
the  prcestigice  here  mentioned  are  afterwards  more  plainly 
expressed;  for  he  tells  us  after,  "sThat  the  bishop  of  Rome 
had  sent  letters  into  the  East,  and  charged  heresy  upon 
Rufinus :"  and  further,  "  that  Origen's  books  Trepi  apx&v  were 
translated  by  him,  and  delivered  to  the  simple  people  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  that  by  his  means  they  might  lose  the  verity 
of  the  faith  which  they  had  learned  from  the  apostle."  There- 
fore the  prcestigice  before-mentioned  were  the  cunning  illusions 
of  Rufinus,  putting  Origen's  book  under  the  martyr  Pam- 
philus  his  name,  that  so  he  might  bring  in  heresy  the  more 
cunningly  under  a  name  of  credit,  and  the  more  easily  pervert 
the  people's  faith.  So,  of  the  faith  he  speaks.  And  secondly, 
I  shall  as  easily  confess,  that  St.  Jerome's  speech  is  most  true, 
but  I  cannot  admit  the  cardinal's  sense  of  it ;  for  he  imposes 
upon  the  word  fides :  for  by  Romana  fides,  "  the  Roman  faith," 

P  Caranza  in  Concil.  Carthag.  sub  be  read  et  jam  si,  for  so  the  place  is 

Cornel,  fine.  more  plain,  and  more  strong ;  but  the 

q  Can.  i  answer  is  the  same. 

r  Attamen  scito  Romanam  fidem  apo-  s  Deinde  ut  epistolas  contra  te  ad 

stolica  voce  laudatam  ejusmodi  prjesti-  Orientem  mitteret,  et  cauterium  tibi 

gias  non  recipere,  etiamsi  angelus  aliter  haereseos  inureret.  Diceretque  libros 

annunciet,  quam  semel  pnedicatum  est,  Origenis  trepl  dp^cSi/,  a  te  translates,  et 

Pauli  authoritate  munitam  non  posse  simplici  ecclesise  Romanae  plebi  tradi- 

mutari.  S.  Hieron.  lib.  iii.  Apol.  con-  tos,  ut  fidei  veritatem  quam  ab  apostolo 

tra  Ruffinum,  torn.  ii.  edit.  Paris.  1534.  didicerant,  per  te  perderent.  S.  Hieron. 

I'ol.  84.  K.  Peradventure  it  is  here  to  ibid.  fol.  85.  K. 

B  4 

8  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  he  will  understand  the  particular  church  of  Rome ;  which  is 
as  much  as  to  say,  Romanos  fideles,  the  faithful  of  that 
church ;  and  that  no  wily  delusions,  or  cozenage  in  matter 
of  faith,  can  be  imposed  upon  them.  Now  hereupon  I  return 
to  that  of  St.  Cyprian :  if  fides  Romana  must  signify  Jideles 
Romanos,  why  may  not  perfidia  before  signify  perfidos  ?  espe- 
cially since  these  two  words  are  commonly  used  by  these 
writers,  as  terms  l  opposite ;  and  therefore,  by  the  law  of 
opposition,  may  interpret  each  other  proportionably.  So  with 
these  great  masters,  with  whom  it  is  almost  grown  to  be, 
quod  wlumus,  rectum  est,  what  we  please  shall  be  the  author's 
meaning,  perfidia  must  signify  absolutely  error  in  faith,  or 
misbelief;  but  jides  must  relate  to  the  persons,  and  signify 
the  faithful  of  the  Roman  church.  And  now  I  conceive  my 
answer  will  proceed  with  a  great  deal  of  reason.  For  Romana 
Jides,  "  the  Roman  faith,"  as  it  was  commended  by  the  apostle, 
(of  which  St.  Jerome  speaks,)  is  one  thing,  and  the  particular 
Roman  church,  of  which  the  cardinal  speaks,  is  another.  The 
faith,  indeed,  admits  not  prcestigias,  wily  delusions,  into  it ; 
if  it  did,  it  could  not  be  the  whole  and  undefiled  faith  of 
Christ,  which  they  learned  from  the  apostle,  and  which  is  so 
fenced  by  apostolical  authority,  as  that  it  cannot  be  changed, 
though  an  angel  should  preach  the  contrary.  But  the  parti- 
cular church  of  Rome  hath  admitted  prcestigias,  divers  crafty 
conveyances,  into  the  faith,  and  is  not  fenced,  as  the  faith 
itself  is:  and  therefore,  though  an  angel  cannot  contrary 
that,  yet  the  bad  angel  hath  sowed  tares  in  this.  By  which 
means  Romana  Jides,  though  it  be  now  the  same  it  was  for 
the  words  of  the  Creed,  yet  it  is  not  the  same  for  the  sense  of 
it ;  nor  for  the  super  and  prseter-structures  built  upon  it,  or 
joined  unto  it.  So  the  Roman  faith,  that  is,  the  faith  which 
St.  Paul  taught  the  Romans,  and  after  commended  in  them, 
was  all  one  with  the  catholic  faith  of  Christ.  For  St.  Paul 
taught  no  other  than  that  one ;  and  this  one  can  never  be 
changed  in  or  from  itself  by  angel  or  devil.  But  in  men's 
hearts  it  may  receive  a  change ;  and  in  particular  churches 

t  Qui  cum  fidei  dux  esse  non  potuit,  rum  iis  non  potest  obesse  perfidia  ?    S. 

perfidiae  existat.  S.Cyprian,  lib.  i.  epist.  Aug.    epist.  23. — Quanto    potius   fides 

7. — Fidem  perfidi,  &c.  Ibid — Facti  sunt  aliena  potest  consulere  parvul.),  cui  sua 

ex  ovibus  vulpes,  ex  fidelibus  perfidi.  perfidia,  &c.     S.  Aug.  lib.  iii.  de  Lib. 

Optatus,   lib.  vii. — Quomodo  iis  prosit  Arbit.  c.  23. 
quum  baptizantur  parentum  fides,  quo- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  9 

it  may  receive  a  change;  and  in  the  particular  church  oi'bcct.  .,. 
Rome  it  hath  received  a  change.  And  ye  see  St.  Jerome 
himself  confesses  that  the  pope  himself  was  afraid  u  ne  perde- 
rent,  lest  by  this  art  of  Ruffinus  the  people  might  lose  the 
verity  of  the  faith.  Now  that  which  can  be  lost  can  be 
changed:  for  usually  habits  begin  to  alter  before  they  be 
quite  lost.  And  that  which  may  be  lost  among  the  people 
may  be  lost  among  the  bishops,  and  the  rest  of  the  clergy  too, 
if  they  look  not  to  it;  as  it  seems  they  after  did  not  at 
Borne,  though  then  they  did.  Nay,  at  this  time  the  whole 
Eoman  church  was  in  danger  enough  to  swallow  Origen's  book, 
and  all  the  errors  in  it,  coming  under  the  name  of  Pamphi- 
lus :  and  so  St.  Jerome  himself  expressly,  and  close  upon  the 
place  cited  by  Bellarmine.  For  he  desires  x  Ruffinus  to  change 
the  title  of  the  book,  (that  error  may  not  be  spread  under  the 
specious  name  of  Pamphilus,)  and  so  to  free  from  danger  the 
Roman  simplicity :  where,  by  the  way,  Roman  unerring  power 
now  challenged,  and  Roman  simplicity  then  feared,  agree  not 
very  well  together. 

X. — 3.  The  third  Father  alleged  by  Bellarmine  is  y  St.  Gre- 
gory Nazianzen.  And  his  words  are :  "  That  ancient  Rome 
from  of  old  hath  the  right  faith,  and  always  holds  it,  as 
becomes  the  city  which  is  governess  over  the  whole  world,  to 
have  an  entire  faith  in  and  concerning  God."  Now  certainly 
it  became  that  city  very  well  to  keep  the  faith  sound  and 
entire.  And  having  the  government  of  great  part  of  the 
world  then  in  her  power,  it  became  her  so  much  the  more,  as 
her  example  thereby  was  the  greater.  And  in  St.  Gregory 
Nazianzen's  time  Rome  did  certainly  hold  both  rectam  et  inte- 
gram  fidem,  the  right  and  the  whole  entire  faith  of  Christ. 
But  there  is  nor  promise  nor  prophecy  in  St.  Gregory  that 
Rome  shall  ever  so  do.  For  his  words  are  plain;  deceit 
semper,  it  becomes  that  great  city  always  to  have,  and  to 
hold  too,  integrant  fidem,  the  entire  faith.  But  at  the  other 

u  Ne  fidei  veritatem,  quam  ah  apo-  bus  habet  rectam  fidem,  et  semper  earn 

stolo  didicerant,  per  te  perderent;  ut  retinet,  sicut  decet  urbem,  qua;  toti 

supra.  orbi  pnvsidet,  semper  de  Deo  integram 

x  Muta  titulum,  et  Romanam  sim-  fidem  habere.  Greg.  Naz.  in  Carmine 

plicitatem  tanto.  periculo  libera.  Ibid,  de  vita  sua ;  ante  medium,  p.  9.  edit, 

fol.  84.  K.  Paris.  1609. 

y  Vetus  Roma  ab  antiquis  tempori- 

10  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  semper,  it  is  zretinet;  that  city  from  of  old  holds  the  right 
faith  yet :  but  he  saith  not,  retinebit  semper,  that  the  city  of 
Rome  shall  retain  it  ever,  no  more  than  it  shall  ever  retain 
the  empire  of  the  world.  Now  it  must  be  assured,  that  it 
shall  ever  hold  the  entire  faith  of  Christ,  before  we  can  be 
assured  that  that  particular  church  can  never  err,  or  be 

XL — Besides  these,  the  cardinal  names  Cyrillus  and  Rufi- 
nus ;  but  he  neither  tells  us  where,  nor  cites  their  words. 
Yet  I  think  I  have  found  the  most  pregnant  place  in  a  St. 
Cyril,  and  that  makes  clearly  against  him.  For  I  find  ex- 
pressly these  three  things.  First,  that  the  church  is  inex- 
pugnable, and  that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  never  prevail  against 
it  ,•  but  that  it  shall  in  perpetuum  manere,  remain  for  ever. 
And  this  all  protestants  grant.  But  this,  that  it  shall  not 
fall  away,  doth  not  secure  it  from  all  kinds  of  error.  Second- 
ly, Bellarmine  quotes  St.  Cyril  for  the  particular  Roman 
church ;  and  St.  Cyril  speaks  not  of  the  Roman  at  all,  but 
of  the  church  of  Christ,  that  is,  the  catholic  church.  Thirdly, 
that  the  foundation  and  firmness  which  the  church  of  Christ 
hath,  is  placed  not  in  or  upon  the  b  person,  much  less  the 
successor  of  St.  Peter ;  but  upon  the  c  faith  which,  by  God's 
Spirit  in  him,  he  so  firmly  professed :  which  is  the  common 
received  opinion  both  of  the  ancient  Fathers  and  the  protest- 
ants.  Upon  this  rock,  that  is,  upon  this  faith,  will  I  build  my 
church  d.  So  here  is  all  the  good  he  hath  gotten  by  St.  Cyril, 
unless  he  can  cite  some  other  place  of  St.  Cyril,  which  I  believe 
he  cannot. 

XII. — And  for  Rufinus,  the  place  which  Bellarmine  aims 
at  is  in  his  Exposition  upon  the  Creed,  and  is  quoted  in  part 

z  The  words  in  the  Greek  are,  TJ  tuum  manens.   S.  Cyril.  Alexarid.  Dial. 

i\v  e/c  TrAeioyos,  Kal  vvv  er'  effTiv  evSpo-  de  Trin.    lib.  iv.  p.  278.     Parisiis,  an. 

pos.      Haec  quidem  fuit  diu,  et  mine  1604. 

adhuc  est  rectigrada.    "Effriv^  est ;    so  b  Et  ego  dico  tibi]  i.  e.  tuae  confes- 

St.  Gregory  says ;  but  of  an  etrrat,  or  a  sioni,  qua  mini  dixisti,  Tu  es  Christies, 

retinebil,  he  says  nothing  :  nor  is  sem-  &c.   Dion.  Carthus.  in  S.  Matt.  xvi.  18. 

per  in  the  text  of  Nazianzen.  c  Et  super  hanc  Petram]  i.  e.  fidei 

a  Petram  opinor  per  agnominationem  hujus  firmitatem  et  fundamentum.   Vel 

nihil  aliud,  quam  inconcussam  et  firmis-  super  hanc  Petram  quam  corifessus  es, 

simam  discipuli  fidem  vocavit.    In  qua,  i  e.  super  Meipsmn  lapidem  angularem, 

ecclesia  Christi  ita  fundata  et  firmata  &c.    Ibid, 

esset,  ut  non  laberetur,  et  esset  iiiex-  d  Matt.  xvi.  18. 
pugnabilis  inferorurn  portis,  in  perpe- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  11 

the  e  chapter  before.  But  when  all  his  words  shall  be  laid  Sect.  3. 
together,  they  will  make  no  more  for  Bellarmine  and  his 
cause  than  the  former  places  have  done.  f  Rufinus  his  words 
then  run  thus :  "  Before  I  come  to  the  words  of  the  Creed? 
this  I  think  fit  to  warn  you  of,  that  in  divers  churches  some 
things  are  found  added  to  the  words  (of  the  Creed).  But  in 
the  church  of  the  city  of  Rome  this  is  not  found  done :  and, 
as  I  think,  it  is,  for  that  no  heresy  did  take  its  rise  or  begin- 
ning there ;  and  for  that  the  old  custom  is  there  observed, 
namely,  that  they  which  are  to  receive  the  grace  of  baptism 
do  publicly  repeat  the  Creed  in  the  hearing  of  the  people, 
who  would  not  admit  such  additions.  But  in  other  places, 
(as  far  as  I  can  understand,)  by  reason  of  some  heretics,  some 
things  were  added,  but  such  as  were  to  exclude  the  sense 
of  their  novel  doctrine."  Now  these  words  make  little  for 
Bellarmine,  who  cites  them,  and  much  against  Rufinus  that 
uttered  them.  They  make  little  for  Bellarmine.  First,  be- 
cause suppose  Rufinus  his  speech  to  be  true,  yet  this  will 
never  follow.  In  Rufinus  his  time  no  heresy  had  taken  its 
beginning  at  Rome :  therefore  no  heresy  hath  had  rooting 
there  so  many  hundred  years  since.  Secondly,  Bellarmine 
takes  upon  him  there  to  prove  that  the  particular  church  of 
Rome  cannot  err.  Now  neither  can  this  be  concluded  out  of 
Rufinus  his  words.  First,  because  (as  I  said  before)  to  argue 
from  non  sumpsit  to  ergo  sumere  non  potest,  no  heresy  hath  yet 
begun  there,  therefore  none  can  begin  there,  or  spring  thence, 
is  an  argument  drawn  ab  actu  ad  potentiam  negative,  from  the 
act  to  the  power  of  being ;  which  every  novice  in  learning  can 
tell  proceeds  not  negatively.  And  common  reason  tells  every 
man  it  is  no  consequence  to  say,  Such  a  thing  is  not,  or  hath 
not  been,  therefore  it  cannot  be.  Secondly,  because  though 
it  were  true  that  no  heresy  at  all  did  ever  take  its  beginning 

e  Bellar.  lib.  iv.  de  Rom.  Pont.  cap.  audiente,  symbolum  reddere :  et  utique 

3.  §.  penult.  adjectionem  unius  saltern  sermonis,  eo- 

f  Illud  non  importune  commonen-  rum  qui  prsecesserunt  in  tide,  non  ad- 
dum  puto,  quod  in  diversis  ecclesiis  ali-  mittit  auditus.  In  caeteris  autem  locis, 
qua  in  his  verbis  inveniuntur  adjecta.  quantum  inteliigi  datur,  propter  non- 
In  ecclesia  tamen  urbis  Romee  hoc  non  nullos  haereticos  addita  quaedam  viden- 
deprehenditur  factum.  Pro  eo  arbitror,  tur,  per  quae  novelise  doctrinae  sensus 
quod  neque  haeresis  ulla  illic  sumpsit  crederetur  excludi,  &c.  Ruffiu.  in  Ex- 
exordium,  et  mos  ibi  servatur  antiquus,  posit.  Symbol,  (ut  habetur  inter  Opera 
eos  qui  gratiam  baptism!  suscepturi  S.  Cypriani)  Praefat.  Expos, 
sunt,  publico,  id  est,  fidelium  populo 

12  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  at  Rome,  yet  that  can  never  prove  that  the  particular  church 
of  Rome  can  never  err,  (which  is  the  thing  in  question.)  For 
suppose  that  no  heresy  did  ever  begin  there,  yet  if  any  that 
began  elsewhere  were  admitted  into  that  church,  it  is  as  full 
a  proof  that  that  church  can  err,  as  if  the  heresy  had  been 
hatched  into  that  nest.  For  that  church  errs  which  admits  an 
heresy  in  it,  as  well  as  that  which  broaches  it.  Now  Rufinus 
says  no  more  of  the  Roman  church  than  non  sumpsit  exordium, 
no  heresy  took  its  beginning  there ;  but  that  denies  not  but 
that  some  heretical  taint  might  get  in  there :  and  it  is  more 
than  manifest  that  the  most  famous  heresies,  in  their  several 
times,  made  their  abode  even  at  Rome.  And  it  is  observable 
too  that  Bellarmine  cites  no  more  of  Rufinus  his  words  than 
these,  "  In  ecclesia  urbis  Romse  neque  hseresis  ulla  sumpsit 
exordium,  et  mos  ibi  servatur  antiquus,"  as  if  this  were  an 
entire  speech,  whereas  it  comes  in  but  as  a  reason  given  of  the 
speech  precedent ;  and  as  if  Rufinus  made  the  church  of 
Rome  the  great  observer  of  the  customs  of  the  church,  whereas 
he  speaks  but  of  one  particular  custom  of  reciting  the  Creed 
before  baptism.  But  after  all  this,  I  pray,  did  no  heresy  ever 
begin  at  Rome?  Where  did  Novatianism  begin?  At  Rome 
sure.  For  f  Baronius.  s  Pamelius,  and  h  Petavius,  do  all  dispute 
the  point,  whether  that  sect  was  denominated  from  Nova- 
tianus,  the  Roman  priest,  or  Novatus,  the  African  bishop ; 
and  they  conclude  for  Novatian.  He  then  that  gave  that 
name  is  in  all  right  the  founder,  and  Rome  the  nest  of  that 
heresy ;  and  there  it  continued  with  a  succession  of  '  bishops 
from  Cornelius  to  Coelestine,  which  is  near  upon  two  hundred 
years.  Nay,  could  Rufinus  himself  be  ignorant  that  some 
heresy  began  at  Rome  ?  No  sure.  For  in  this  I  must  chal- 
lenge him  either  for  his  weak  memory  or  his  wilful  error. 
For  Ruffinus  had  not  only  read  Eusebius  his  history,  but  had 
been  at  the  pains  to  translate  him.  Now  k  Eusebius  says 
plainly,  that  some  heretics  spread  their  venom  in  Asia,  some 

f  Baron,  torn.  ii.  an.  254.  num.  62.  quorum  dux  Florimis.  Euseb.  lib.  v. 

g  Pamel.  in  Cyprian.  Epist.  41.  et  73.  cap.  14.  And  in  Rufinus  his  translation, 

h  Petavius  in  Epiphan  Hares.  59.  c.  15.  And  then  afterwards,  c.  19  and 

i  Onuph.  in  Notis  ad  Plat,  in  Vita  20  :  QevavTias  5e  TCOV  eVi  'Pu/m.r)s  r*bv 

Cornelii.  vyt^]  T?JS  e/CKATjo'/as  Oeor/jLov  Trapa^ctpoT- 

k  Haeretici  alii  in  morem  venenato-  TOVTWV,  &c.  Now  these  taught  that  God 

rum  serpenturn  in  Asiam  et  Phrygiam  was  the  author  of  sin. 

irrepserunt,  ol  5'   CTT!  'Pup-ris  tfK/j.a£ov, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  13 

in  Phrygia,  and  others  grew  at  Borne ;  and  Florinus  was  the  Sect.  3. 
ringleader  of  them.  And  more  clearly  after.  "  Irenseus," 
saith  he,  "  directed  divers  epistles  against  this  Florinus,  and 
his  fellow  Blastus,  and  condemns  them  of  such  heresies  as 
threw  them  and  their  followers  into  great  impiety,  &c. ;  those 
at  Borne  corrupting  the  sound  doctrine  of  the  church."  There- 
fore most  manifest  it  is  that  some  heresy  had  its  rise  and 
beginning  at  Borne.  But  to  leave  this  slip  of  Bufinus  :  most 
evident  it  is  that  Bufinus  neither  did  nor  could  account  the 
particular  church  of  Borne  infallible ;  for  if  he  had  esteemed 
so  of  it,  he  would  not  have  dissented  from  it  in  so  main  a 
point,  as  is  the  canon  of  the  scripture,  as  he  plainly  doth. 
1  For  reckoning  up  the  canonical  books,  he  most  manifestly 
dissents  from  the  Boman  church.  Therefore  either  Bufinus 
did  not  think  the  church  of  Borne  was  infallible,  or  else  the 
church  of  Borne  at  this  day  reckons  up  more  books  within 
the  canon  than  heretofore  she  did.  If  she  do,  then  she  is 
changed  in  a  main  point  of  faith,  the  canon  of  scripture,  and 
is  absolutely  convinced  not  to  be  infallible :  for  if  she  were 
right  in  her  reckoning  then,  she  is  wrong  now ;  and  if  she  be 
right  now,  she  was  wrong  then :  and  if  she  do  not  reckon 
more  now  than  she  did  when  Bufinus  lived,  then  he  reckons 
fewer  than  she,  and  so  dissents  from  her ;  which  doubtless  he 
durst  not  have  done,  had  he  thought  her  judgment  infallible. 
Yea,  and  he  sets  this  mark  upon  his  dissent  besides,  "  m  that 
he  reckons  up  the  books  of  the  canon  just  so,  and  no  other- 
wise, than  as  he  received  them  out  of  the  monuments  of  the 
forefathers ;  and  out  of  which  the  assertions  of  our  faith  are 
to  be  taken."  Last  of  all :  had  this  place  of  Bufinus  any 
strength  for  the  infallibility  of  the  church  of  Borne,  yet  there 
is  very  little  reason  that  the  pope  and  his  clergy  should  take 
any  benefit  by  it.  For  n  St.  Jerome  tells  us,  "  that  when 

I  Ruf.  in  Exposit.  Symb.  p.  188.    In     ab    eo    exemplar    epistolae   petere,   cui 
which  reckoning  he  plainly  agrees  with     missa  non  est,  &c.     Vade  potius  Ro- 
the  church  of  England,  Art.  VI.  mam,  et  praesens  apud  eum  expostula, 

m  Novi  et  Veteris  Testament!  volu-  cur  tibi  et  absenti  et  innocenti  fecerit 
mina,  &c.  sicut  ex  Patrum  monumentis  *njuriam.      Primum,  ut  non  reciperet 

aecepimus.    Ruf.  in  Symb.  p.  188.      Et  expositionem  fidei  tuae,  quam  omnis  (ut 

haec   sunt  quae   Patres   intra   canonem  scribis)  Italia  comprobavit,  £c.  Deinde, 

conclusernnt.    Et  ex  quibus  fidei  iinstra  ut  cauterium  tibi  haereseos,  dum  nescis, 

assertiones   constare   voluenmt.      Ibid,  inureret.     S.  Hieron.  Apol.  3.  advers. 

p-  189-  Ruffin.  fol.  85.  K. 

II  Si  episcopi  Romani  est,  stulte  facis 

14  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  Rufinus  was  angry  with  him  for  an  epistle  which  he  writ  not, 
he  plainly  sent  him  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  bid  him 
expostulate  with  him  for  the  contumely  put  upon  him,  in  that 
he  received  not  his  exposition  of  the  faith,  which  (said  he)  all 
Italy  approved :  and  in  that  he  branded  him  also,  dum  nesci- 
ret,  (behind  his  back,)  with  heresy."  Now  if  the  pope  which 
then  was  rejected  this  exposition  of  the  Creed  made  by  Rufi- 
nus,  and  branded  him  besides  with  heresy,  his  sentence  against 
Rufinus  was  just  or  unjust :  if  unjust,  then  the  pope  erred 
about  a  matter  of  faith ;  and  so  neither  he,  nor  the  church  of 
Rome,  infallible:  if  just,  then  the  church  of  Rome  labours  to 
defend  herself  by  his  pen,  which  is  judged  heretical  by  herself. 
So,  whether  it  were  just  or  unjust,  the  church  of  Rome  is 
driven  to  a  hard  strait,  when  she  must  beg  help  of  him  whom 
she  branded  with  heresy,  and  out  of  that  tract  which  she 
herself  rejected ;  and  so  uphold  her  infallibility  by  the  judg- 
ment of  a  man,  who,  in  her  judgment,  had  erred  so  foully : 
nor  may  she  by  any  n  law  take  benefit  of  a  testimony  which 
herself  hath  defamed  and  protested  against. 

XIII. — With  these  Bellarmine  is  pleased  to  name  six  or 
0  seven  popes,  which,  he  saith,  are  all  of  this  opinion.  But  of 
popes1  opinions  he  saith,  that  P  "  these  testimonies  will  be  con- 
temned by  the  heretics."  Good  words,  I  pray.  I  know  whom 
the  cardinal  means  by  heretics  very  well ;  but  the  best  is,  his 
call  cannot  make  them  so.  Nor  shall  I  easily  contemn  seven 
ancient  bishops  of  Rome  concurring  in  opinion,  if  apparent 
verity  in  the  thing  itself  do  not  force  me  to  dissent ;  and  in 
that  case  I  shall  do  it  without  contempt  too.  This  only  I 
will  say,  q  that  seven  popes  concurring  in  opinion  shall  have 
less  weight  with  me  in  their  own  cause  than  any  other  seven 
of  the  more  ancient  Fathers.  Indeed,  could  I  swallow  rBellar- 
mine's  opinion,  that  the  pope's  judgment  is  infallible,  I  would 
then  submit  without  any  more  ado.  But  that  will  never 

n  Quum  qnis  se  velle  personas  tes-  nisi  conformiter  ad  legem  divinam,  na- 

tium  post  publicationem  repellere  fuerit  turalem  et  canonicam  loquatur.    So  Jo. 

protestatus ;  si  quid  pro  ipso  dixerint,  Gerson,  and  the  doctors  of  Paris,  cited 

iis   non  creditur.     Extra.   Tex.  et  ibi  in   Lib.  Anon,  de  Ecclesiastica  et  Poli- 

Gloss.  c.  Praesentium  31.  de  Testibus.  tica    Potestate,    c.  16.   ed.  Paris.  1612. 

o  Lib.  iv.  c.  3.  §.  I)e  altero  ergo.  Now  these  popes  do  not  speak  here  con- 

P  Quae  etsi  ab  haereticis  contemneri-  formably  to  these  laws. 
tur.  Lib.  iv.  c.  4  §.  Addo  etiam.  r    Lib.  iv.    de    Rom.  Pont.  c.  3.   in 

'l  Nemini  in  sua  causa  credendum,  initio. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  15 

down  with  me,  unless  I  live  till  I  dote,  which  I  hope  in  God  Sect.  3. 
I  shall  not. 

XIV. — Other  proofs  than  these  Bellarmine  brings  not,  to 
prove  that  the  particular  church  of  Rome  cannot  err  in  or 
from  the  faith.  And  of  what  force  these  are  to  sway  any 
judgment,  I  submit  to  all  indifferent  readers.  And  having 
thus  examined  Bellarmine's  proofs,  that  the  particular  church 
of  Rome  cannot  err  in  faith,  I  now  return  to  A.  C.  and  the  A.  C.  p.  42. 
Jesuit ;  and  tell  them,  that  no  Jesuit,  or  any  other,  is  ever 
able  to  prove  any  particular  church  infallible. 

XV. — But  for  the  particular  church  of  Rome,  and  the  pope 
with  it,  erred  it  hath,  and  therefore  may  err :  erred,  I  say,  it 
hath,  in  the  worship  of  images,  and  in  altering  Chrisfs  insti- 
tution in  the  blessed  sacrament,  by  taking  away  the  cup  from 
the  people ;  and  divers  other  particulars,  as  shall  appear  at 
s  after.  And  as  for  the  ground  which  is  presumed  to  secure 
this  church  from  error,  it  is  very  remarkable  how  the  t  learned 
cardinal  speaks  in  this  case ;  for  he  tells  us,  that  this  propo- 
sition, "  So  long  as  St.  Peters  chair  is  at  Rome,  that  particu- 
lar church  cannot  err  in  the  faith,"  is  verissima,  most  true ; 
and  yet  in  the  very  next  words  it  is  fortasse  tarn  vera,  perad- 
venture  as  true  as  the  former,  that  is,  "  That  the  pope,  when 
he  teaches  the  whole  church  in  those  things  which  belong  to 
the  faith,  cannot  err  in  any  case."  What !  Is  that  proposition 
most  true !  and  yet  is  it  but  at  a  peradventure  it  is  as  true 
as  this  ?  Is  it  possible  any  thing  should  be  absolutely  most 
true,  and  yet  under  a  peradventure  that  it  is  but  as  true  as 
another  truth?  But  here,  without  all  peradventure,  neither 
proposition  is  true.  And  then  indeed  Bellarmine  may  say, 
without  a,  fortasse, that  this  proposition,  "The  particular  church 
of  Rome  cannot  err,  so  long  as  the  see  apostolic  is  there,"  is 
as  true  as  this ;  "  The  pope  cannot  err  while  he  teaches  the 
whole  church  in  those  things  which  belong  to  the  faith :"  for 
neither  of  them  is  true.  But  he  cannot  say  that  either  of 
them  is  verissima,  most  true,  when  neither  of  them  hath 

s  §.  33.  Consid.  7.  Num.  5.  et  12.  c.  4.  §.  2.  edit.  Lugdun.  1596.      And 

t    Romana  ecclesia  particularis   non  that  first  proposition  is  this :  Snmmus 

potest  errare,  persistente  Romae  aposto-  pontifex,  cum  totam  ecclesiam  docet,  in 

lica  sede.     Propositio  haec  est  verissima,  his  quae  ad  fidem  pertinent  nullo  casu 

et  fortasse  tarn  vera  quam  ilia  prima  errare  potest.    Ibid.  c.  3.  §.  I. 
de  pontifice.    Lib.  iv.  de  Rom.   Pont. 

16  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3.  XVI. — 2.  Secondly,  if  the  particular  church  of  Borne  be 
infallible,  and  can  neither  err  in  the  faith,  nor  fall  from  it, 
then  it  is  because  the  see  apostolic  cannot  be  transferred  from 
Rome,  but  must  ever,  to  the  consummation  of  the  world, 
remain  there,  and  keep  that  particular  church  from  erring. 
Now  to  this  what  says  Bellarmine  \  What !  why  he  tells  us, 
uthat  it  is  a  pious  and  most  probable  opinion  to  think  so. 
And  he  reckons  four  probabilities  that  it  shall  never  be 
removed  from  Rome.  And  I  will  not  deny  but  some  of  them 
are  fair  probabilities ;  but  yet  they  are  but  probabilities,  and 
so  unable  to  convince  any  man.  Why  but  then,  what  if  a 
man  cannot  think  as  Bellarmine  doth,  but  that,  enforced  by 
the  light  of  his  understanding,  he  must  think  the  quite  con- 
trary to  this  which  Bellarmine  thinks  pious,  and  so  probable  2 
What  then  2  Why  then  x  Bellarmine  himself  tells  you,  that 
the  quite  contrary  proposition  to  this,  namely,  that  "  St. 
Peter's  chair  may  be  severed  from  Rome,  and  that  then  that 
particular  church  may  err,  is  neither  heretical  nor  manifestly 
erroneous."  So  then,  by  Bellarmine's  own  confession,  I  am 
no  heretic,  nor  in  any  manifest  error,  if  I  say  (as  indeed  I  do, 
and  think  it  too)  that  it  is  possible  for  St.  Peter's  chair  to  be 
carried  from  Rome,  and  that  then  at  least,  by  his  own  argu- 
ment, that  church  may  err. 

XVII. — Now  then,  upon  the  whole  matter,  and  to  return 
A.  C.  p.  42.  to  A.  C.  If  that  lady  desired  to  rely  upon  a  particular  infal- 
lible church,  it  is  not  to  be  found  on  earth.  Rome  hath  not 
that  gift,  nor  her  bishop  neither.  And  Bellarmine  (who  I 
think  was  as  able  as  any  champion  that  church  hath)  dares 
not  say  it  is  either  heresy  or  a  manifest  error  to  say,  that  the 
apostolic  see  may  be  removed  thence,  and  that  church  not 
only  err  in  faith,  but  also  fall  quite  away  from  it.  Now  I, 
for  my  part,  have  not  ignorance  enough  in  me  to  believe  that 
that  church,  which  may  apostatize  at  some  one  time,  may  not 
err  at  another ;  especially  since  both  her  erring  and  failing 
may  arise  from  other  causes  besides  that  which  is  mentioned 
by  the  cardinal.  And  if  it  may  err,  it  is  not  infallible. 

u  Pia  et  probabilissima  sententia  est,  nihilominus. 

t-athedram  Petri  non  posse  separari  a         x  Contraria  sententia  nee  est  haere- 

Roma,  et  proinde  Romanam  ecclesiatn  tica,  nee  manifeste  erronea.    Lib.  iv.  de 

absolute  non  posse  errare,  vel  deficere.  Rom.  Pont.  c.  4.  §.  At  secundum. 
Lib.  iv.  de  Rom.  Pont.   c.  4.   §.  Quod 

Fisher  the  Jesuit,  17 

$.  The  question  was,  Which  was  that  church?  A  friend  of  Sect.  3-5. 
the  lady's  would  needs  defend,  that  not  only  the  Roman, 
but  also  the  Greek  church  was  right. 

13,  When  that  honourable  personage  answered,  I  was  not  Sect.  4. 
by  to  hear.     But  I  presume  he  was  so  far  from  granting  that 
only  the  Roman  church  was  right,  as  that  he  did  not  grant  it 
right ;  and  that  he  took  on  him  no  other  defence  of  the  poor 
Greek  church  than  was  according  to  truth. 

jp.  I  told  him  that  the  Greek  church  had  plainly  changed, 
and  taught  false  in  a  point  of  doctrine  concerning  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  and  that  I  had  heard  say,  that  even  his 
majesty  should  say  that  the  Greek  church  having  erred 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  had  lost  the  Holy  Ghost. 
33.  You  are  very  bold  with  his  majesty,  to  relate  him  upon  Sect.  5. 
hearsay.  My  intelligence  serves  me  not  to  tell  you  what  his 
majesty  said :  but  if  he  said  it  not,  you  have  been  too  credu- 
lous to  believe  and  too  sudden  to  report  it.  Princes  deserve, 
and  were  wont  to  have,  more  respect  than  so.  If  his  majesty 
did  say  it,  there  is  truth  in  the  speech ;  the  error  is  yours 
only,  by  mistaking  what  is  meant  by  losing  the  Holy  Ghost. 
For  a  particular  church  may  be  said  to  lose  the  Holy  Ghost 
two  ways,  or  in  two  degrees.  J .  The  one,  when  it  loses  such 
special  assistance  of  that  blessed  Spirit,  as  preserves  it  from 
all  dangerous  errors  and  sins,  and  the  temporal  punishment 
which  is  due  unto  them :  and  in  this  sense  the  Greek  church 
did  perhaps  lose  the  Holy  Ghost ;  for  they  erred  against  him, 
they  sinned  against  God.  And  for  this,  or  other  sins,  they 
were  delivered  into  another  Babylonish  captivity  under  the 
Turk ;  in  which  they  yet  are,  and  from  which  God  in  his 
mercy  deliver  them.  But  this  is  rather  to  be  called  an  error 
circa  Spiritum  Sanctum,  about  the  doctrine  concerning  the 
Holy  Ghost,  than  an  error  against  the  Holy  Ghost.  2.  The 
other  is,  when  it  loses  not  only  this  assistance,  but  all  assist- 
ance ad  hoc,  to  this,  that  they  may  remain  any  longer  a 
true  church ;  and  so  Corinth  and  Ephesus,  and  divers  other 
churches,  have  lost  the  Holy  Ghost :  but  in  this  sense  the 
whole  Greek  church  lost  not  the  Holy  Ghost ;  for  they  con- 
tinue a  true  church,  in  the  main  substance,  to  and  at  this  day, 


18  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  5-7.  though  erroneous  in  this  point  which  you  mention,  and  per- 
haps in  some  other  too. 

$.  The  lady's  friend,  not  knowing  what  to  answer,  called 
in  the  bishop,  who  sitting  down  first  excused  himself  as 
one  unprovided,  and  not  much  studied  in  controversies ; 
and  desiring  that  in  case  he  should  fail,  yet  the  pro- 
testant  cause  might  not  be  thought  ill  of — 

Sect.  6.  23.  This  is  most  true :  for  I  did  indeed  excuse  myself,  and 
I  had  great  reason  so  to  do.  And  my  reason  being  grounded 
upon  modesty,  for  the  most  part,  there  I  leave  it.  Yet  this 
it  may  be  fit  others  should  know,  that  I  had  no  information 
where  the  other  conferences  brake  off;  no  instruction  at  all 
what  should  be  the  ground  of  this  third  conference,  nor  the 
full  time  of  four  and  twenty  hours  to  bethink  myself.  And 
this  I  take  upon  my  credit  is  most  true :  whereas  you  make 
the  sifting  of  these  and  the  like  questions  to  the  very  bran, 
your  daily  work,  and  came  throughly  furnished  to  the  busi- 
ness, and  might  so  lead  on  the  controversy  to  what  yourself 
pleased,  and  I  was  to  follow  as  I  could,  y  St.  Augustine  said 
once,  Scio  me  invalidum  esse,  I  know  I  am  weak ;  and  yet  he 
made  good  his  cause:  and  so  perhaps  may  I  against  you. 
And  in  that  I  preferred  the  cause  before  my  particular  credit, 
that  which  I  did  was  with  modesty,  and  according  to  reason. 
For  there  is  no  reason  the  weight  of  this  whole  cause  should 
rest  upon  any  one  particular  man ;  and  great  reason  that  the 
personal  defects  of  any  man  should  press  himself,  but  not 
the  cause.  Neither  did  I  enter  upon  this  service  out  of  any 
forwardness  of  my  own,  but  commanded  to  it  by  supreme 

;JF.  It  having  an  hundred  better  scholars  to  maintain  it 
than  he.  To  which  I  said,  there  were  a  thousand  better 
scholars  than  I  to  maintain  the  catholic  cause. 

23.  In  this  I  had  never  so  poor  a  conceit  of  the  protestants1 
cause,  as  to  think  that  they  had  but  an  hundred  better  than 
myself  to  maintain  it.  That  which  hath  an  hundred  may 
have  as  many  more  as  it  pleases  God  to  give  and  more  than 

y  De  Util.  Credendi,  c.  2. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  19 

you.  And  I  shall  ever  be  glad  that  the  church  of  England  Sect.  7-9. 
(which,  at  this  time,  if  my  memory  reflect  not  amiss,  I  named) 
may  have  far  more  able  defendants  than  myself.  I  shall 
never  envy  them,  but  rejoice  for  her.  And  I  make  no  ques- 
tion, but  that  if  I  had  named  a  thousand,  you  would  have 
multiplied  yours  into  ten  thousand  for  the  catholic  cause  (as 
you  call  it).  And  this  confidence  of  yours  hath  ever  been 
fuller  of  noise  than  proof.  But  you  proceed. 

jp.  Then  the  question  about  the  Greek  church  being  pro- 
posed, I  said  as  before,  that  it  had  erred. 

33.  Then  I  think  the  question  about  the  Greek  church  was  Sect.  8. 
proposed.  But  after  you  had  with  confidence  enough  not 
spared  to  say,  that  what  I  would  not  acknowledge  in  this 
cause,  you  would  wring  and  extort  from  me ;  then  indeed  you 
said  as  before,  that  it  had  erred :  and  this  no  man  denied. 
But  every  error  denies  not  Christ,  the  foundation ;  or  makes 
Christ  deny  it,  or  thrust  it  from  the  foundation. 

j£.   The   bishop   said,  that  the   error  was   not  in   points 

9tf.  I. — I  was  not  so  peremptory.  My  speech  was,  that  divers  Sect.  9. 
learned  men,  and  some  of  your  own,  were  of  opinion,  that  (as 
the  Greeks  expressed  themselves)  it  was  a  question  not 
simply  fundamental.  I  know  and  acknowledge  that  error, 
of  denying  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Son, 
to  be  a  grievous  error  in  divinity.  And  sure  it  would  have 
grated  the  foundation,  if  they  had  so  denied  the  procession 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Son,  as  that  they  had  made  an 
inequality  between  the  persons.  But  since  their  form  of 
speech  is,  "zthat  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the  Father 
by  the  Son,  and  is  the  Spirit  of  the  Son,""  without  making 
any  difference  in  the  consubstantiality  of  the  persons,  I  dare 
not  deny  them  to  be  a  true  church  for  this ;  though  I  confess 
them  an  erroneous  church  in  this  particular. 

II. — Now  that  divers  learned  men  were  of  opinion,  that  a 
Filio  and  per  Filium  in  the  sense  of  the  Greek  church 
was  but  a  question  in  modo  loquendi,  in  manner  of  speech, 

z  Non  ex  Filio,  sed  Spiritum  Filii  esse  dicimus.  Damascen.  lib.  i.  Fid. 
Orth.  c.  1 1 .  Et  Patris  per  Filium.  ibid. 

C  2 


20  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  9.  aan(i  therefore  not  fundamental,  is  evident.  bThe  master  and 
his  scholars  agree  upon  it.  "  The  Greeks,"  saith  he,  "  confess 
the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  the  Spirit  of  the  Son,  with  the  apostle, 
Galat.  iv.,  and  the  Spirit  of  truth,  St.  John  xvi.  And  since  non 
est  aliud,  it  is  not  another  thing  to  say,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the 
Spirit  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  than  that  he  is  or  pro- 
ceeds from  the  Father  and  the  Son;  in  this  they  seem  to 
agree  with  us  in  eandem  fidei  sententiam,  upon  the  same 
sentence  of  faith,  though  they  differ  in  words."  Now  in  this 
cause,  where  the  words  differ  but  the  sentence  of  faith  is 
the  same,  cpenitus  eadem,  even  altogether  the  same,  can  the 
point  be  fundamental  ?  You  may  make  them  no  church  (as 
dBellarmine  doth)  and  so  deny  them  salvation,  which  cannot 
be  had  out  of  the  true  church ;  but  I  for  my  part  dare  not 
so  do.  And  Rome  in  this  particular  should  be  more  moderate, 
if  it  be  but  because  this  article  (Filioque)  was  added  to  the 
Creed  by  herself.  And  it  is  hard  to  add  and  anathematize  too. 
III. — It  ought  to  be  no  easy  thing  to  condemn  a  man  of 
heresy  in  foundation  of  faith ;  much  less  a  church ;  least  of 
all  so  ample  and  large  a  church  as  the  Greek,  especially  so 
as  to  make  them  no  church.  Heaven  gates  were  not  so  easily 
shut  against  multitudes  when  St.  Peter  wore  the  keys  at  his 

a  Pluralitas  in  voce,  salvata  unitate  q.  i . — Antiquorum  Graecorum  a  Latinis 

in  re,  non  repugnat  unitati  fidei.  Du-  discrepantia  in  voce  potius  est,  et  modo 

rand.  lib.  3.  d.  25.  q.  2.  explicandi  emanationem  Spiritus  Sancti 

b  Magist.  i.  Sent.  d.  1 1.  D.  Sane  sci-  quam  in  ipsa  re,  &c.  Jodocus  Clictoveus 

endum  est,  quod  licet  in  praesenti  arti-  in  Damasc.  lib.  i.  Fid.  Orth.  c.  n. — Et 

culo  a  nobis  Graeci   verbo  discordent,  quidam  ex  Graecis  concedunt,  quod  sit 

tamen  sensu  non  differunt,  &c. — Ban-  a  Filio,  vel  ab  eo  profluat.    Thorn,  p.  i. 

dinus,  lib.  i.  de  Trin.  d.  n.  et  Bona-  q.  36.  A.  2.  C. — Et  Thomas  ipse  dicit, 

vent,  in  i  Sent.  d.  n.  A.  i.  q.  i.  §.  12.  Spiritum  Sanctum  procedere  mediate  a 

Licet  Graecis  infensissimus,  quum  dixit  Filio.  Ib.  A.  3.  ad  i.  saltern  ratione  per- 

Graecos  objicere  curiositatem  Romanis,  sonarum  spirantium. 

addendo  Filioque ;  quia  sine  hujus  ar-  Respondeo  cum  Bessarione  et  Gen- 

ticuli  professione   salus  erat;   non  re-  nadio,  Damascenum  non  negasse  Spi- 

spondet  negando  salutem  esse,  sed  dicit  ritum  Sanctum  procedere  ex  Filio,  quod 

tantum  opportunam  fuisse  determina-  ad  rem  attinet,  quum  dixerit  Spiritum 

tionem  propter  periculum.     Et  postea  esse  imaginem  Filii,  et  per  Filium,  sed 

§.15:    Sunt  qui  volunt  sustinere  opin-  existimasse  tutius  did  per  Filium,  quam 

ionem  Graecorum,  et  Latinorum,  distin-  ex  Filio,  quantum  ad  modum  loquendi, 

guendo  duplicem  modum  procedendi.  &c.  Bellarm.  lib.  2.  de  Christo,  c.  27.  §. 

Sed  forte  si  duo  sapientes,  unus  Grae-  Respondeo  igitur.    Et  Toilet,  in  S.  Joh. 

cus,  alter  Latinus,  uterque  verus  ama-  15.    Ar.  25.    et   Lutheran.    Resp.    ad 

tor  veritatis,  et  non  propriae  dictionis,  Resp.  2.  Jeremiae  Patriarchae. 

&c.  de  hac  visa  contrarietate  disquire-  c  Eadem  penitus  sententia,  ubi  supra, 

rent,  pateret  utique  tandem  ipsam  con  -  Clictov. 

trarietatem  non  esse  veraciter  realem,  d  Bellarm.  4.  de  Notis  Eccl.  cap.  8. 

sicut  est  vocalis.  Scotus  in  i.  Sent.  d.  1 1.  §.  Quod  autem  apud  Graecos. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  21 

own  girdle.  And  it  is  good  counsel  which  eAlphonsus  a  Sect.  9,10. 
Castro,  one  of  your  own,  gives :  "  Let  them  consider  that 
pronounce  easily  of  heresy,  how  easy  it  is  for  themselves  to 
err."  Or  if  you  will  pronounce,  consider  what  it  is  that 
separates  from  the  church  simply,  and  not  in  part  only.  I 
must  needs  profess,  that  I  wish  heartily  (as  well  as  Bothers) 
that  those  distressed  men,  whose  cross  is  heavy  already,  had 
been  more  plainly  and  moderately  dealt  withal,  though  they 
think  a  diverse  thing  from  us,  than  they  have  been  by  the 
church  of  Rome.  But  hereupon  you  say  you  were  forced — 

$.  Whereupon  I  was  forced  to  repeat  what  I  had  formerly 
brought  against  Dr.  White,  concerning  points  funda- 

3$.  I. — Hereupon  it  is  true,  that  you  read  a  large  discourse  Sect.  10. 
out  of  a  book  printed,  which,  you  said,  was  yours ;  the  par- 
ticulars (all  of  them  at  the  least)  I  do  not  now  remember,  nor 
did  I  then  approve.  But  if  they  be  such  as  were  formerly 
brought  against  Dr.  White,  they  are  by  him  formerly  answered. 
The  first  thing  you  did  was  the  s  righting  of  St.  Augustine ; 
which  sentence  I  do  not  at  all  remember  was  so  much  as  named 
in  the  conference,  much  less  was  it  stood  upon,  and  then  righted 
by  you.  Another  place  of  St.  Augustine  indeed  was  (which 
you  omit,  but  it  comes  after)  about  tradition,  to  which  I 
remit  it.  But  now  you  tell  us  of  a  great  proof  made  out  of 
this  h  place:  for  these  words  of  yours  contain  two  propositions: 
one,  "  That  all  points  defined  by  the  church  are  fundamental ;" 
the  other,  "  That  this  is  proved  out  of  this  place  of  St. 

II. — i.  For  the  first,  That  all  points  defined  by  the  church 
are  fundamental.  It  was  not  the  least  means  by  which  Rome 
grew  to  her  greatness,  to  blast  every  opposer  she  had  with 

e  Lib.  3.  cont.  Haeres.  fol.  93.  A.    Ut  very  learnedly,  that  my  corrupt  copy 

videant   hi,  qui  facile  de   haeresi  pro-  hath   righting   instead    of  reading  the 

nuntiant,  quara  facile  etiam  ipsi  errent :  sentence  of  St.  Austin.   Whereas  I  here 

et  intelligant,  non  esse  tarn  leviter  de  use  the  word  righting,  not  as  it  is  op. 

haeresi  censendum,  &c.  In  verbo  Beati-  posed  to  reading,  (as  any  man  may  dis- 

tudo.  cern  A.  C.  palpably  mistakes,)  but  for 

f  Junius,  Animad.  inBellarm.  cont.  2.  doing  right  to  St.  Austin.    And  if  1  had 

1.  3.  c.  23.  meant  it  for  writing,  I  should  not  have 

£  F.  First  righting  the  sentence  of  spelled  it  so. 

St.  Austin  :  Ferendus  est  disputator  er-         h  By  which  is  proved,  That  all  points 

rans,  &c.     Here  A.  C.  p.  44.  tells  us  defined  by  the  church  are  fundamental. 

22  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  the  name  of  heretic  or  schismatic ;  for  this  served  to  shrivel 
the  credit  of  the  persons.  And  the  persons  once  brought 
into  contempt  and  ignominy,  all  the  good  they  desired  in  the 
church  fell  to  dust  for  want  of  creditable  persons  to  back  and 
support  it.  To  make  this  proceeding  good  in  these  later 
years,  this  course  (it  seems)  was  taken.  The  school  that 
must  maintain  (and  so  they  do)  "  that  all  points  defined  by 
the  church  are  thereby  'fundamental,  k  necessary  to  be  be- 
lieved, ]of  the  substance  of  the  faith;"  and  that,  though  it 
be  determined  quite  m  extra  scripturam.  And  then  n  leave 
the  wise  and  active  heads  to  take  order,  that  there  be  strength 
enough  ready  to  determine  what  is  fittest  for  them. 

III. — But  since  these  men  distinguish  not,  nor  you,  between 
the  church  in  general,  and  a  general  council,  which  is  but  her 
representation  for  determinations  of  the  faith ;  though  I  be 
very  slow  in  sifting  or  opposing  what  is  concluded  by  lawful, 
general,  and  consenting  authority ;  though  I  give  as  much  as 
can  justly  be  given  to  the  definitions  of  councils  truly  general ; 
nay,  suppose  I  should  grant  (which  I  do  not)  that  general 
councils  cannot  err ;  yet  this  cannot  down  with  me,  that  all 
points  even  so  defined  are  fundamental.  For  deductions  are 
not  prime  and  native  principles,  nor  are  superstructures 
foundations.  That  which  is  a  foundation  for  all  cannot  be 
one  and  another  to  different  Christians  in  regard  of  itself; 
for  then  it  could  be  no  common  rule  for  any,  nor  could  the 
souls  of  men  rest  upon  a  shaking  foundation.  No  :  if  it  be  a 
true  foundation,  it  must  be  common  to  all,  and  firm  under 
all ;  in  which  sense  the  articles  of  Christian  faith  are  funda- 
mental. And  °  Irenseus  lays  this  for  a  ground,  that  the  whole 
church  (howsoever  dispersed  in  place)  speaks  this  with  one 
mouth :  "  He  which  among  the  guides  of  the  church  is  best 
able  to  speak  utters  no  more  than  this ;  and  less  than  this 
the  most  simple  doth  not  utter."  Therefore  the  Creed  (of 

i  Your  own  word.  Greg.  Naz.  de  differen.  vitae.    Cercopes 

k  Inconcussa  fide  ab  omnibus  Thorn,  vocat  astutos,  et  veteratoriae  cujusdam 

2.  2ae.  q.  I.  Art.  10.  C.  improbitatis  episcopos,  qui  artibus  suis 

1  Scotus  i.  Sent.  d.  ii.  q.  i.  ac  dolis   omnia   concilia   perturbabant. 

m  Ecclesiae  voces  etiam  extra  scriptu-  Schol.  ib. 

ram.  Stap.  Relect.  con.  4.  q.  i.  Ar.  3.          o  Quum  enim  una  et  eadem  fides  sit, 

Quae  mature  judicio  definivit,  &c.   Soli-  neque   is   qui   multum   de   ipsa   dicere 

dum  est,  et  etiamsi  nullo  scripturarum  potest,  plusquam  oportet,  dicit ;  neque 

aut  evidenti,  aut  probabili    testimonio  qui  parum,  ipsam  imminuit.  Iren.lib.  i. 

confirmaretur.  ib.  advers.  Haeres.  c.  3. 

n  Et    penes    Cercopes    victoria   sit ; 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  23 

which  he   speaks)  is  a  common,  is   a  constant  foundation.  Sect.  10. 
And  an  explicit  faith  must  be  of  this  in  them  which  have  the 
use  of  reason;   for  both  guides  and  simple  people,  all  the 
church,  utter  this. 

IV. — Now  many  things  are  defined  by  the  church  which 
are  but  deductions  out  of  this,  which  (suppose  them  deduced 
right)  move  far  from  the  foundation ;  without  which  deduc- 
tions explicitly  believed,  many  millions  of  Christians  go  to 
heaven;  and  cannot  therefore  be  fundamental  in  the  faith. 
True  deductions  from  the  article  may  require  necessary  belief 
in  them  which  are  able,  and  do  go  along  with  them  from  the 
principle  to  the  conclusion.  But  I  do  not  see,  either  that  the 
learned  do  make  them  necessary  to  all,  or  any  reason  why 
they  should.  Therefore  they  cannot  be  fundamental ;  and  yet 
to  some  men's  salvation  they  are  necessary. 

V. — Besides,  that  which  is  fundamental  in  the  faith  of 
Christ  is  a  rock  immovable,  and  can  never  be  varied. 
Never  P.  Therefore,  if  it  be  fundamental  after  the  church 
hath  defined  it,  it  was  fundamental  before  the  definition,  else 
it  is  movable;  and  then  no  Christian  hath  where  to  rest. 
And  if  it  be  immovable,  as  q  indeed  it  is,  no  decree  of  a 
council,  be  it  never  so  general,  can  alter  immovable  verities, 
no  more  than  it  can  change  immovable  natures.  Therefore 
if  the  church  in  a  council  define  any  thing,  the  thing  defined 
is  not  fundamental  because  the  church  hath  defined  it,  nor 
can  be  made  so  by  the  definition  of  the  church,  if  it  be  not  so 
in  itself.  For  if  the  church  had  this  power,  she  might  make 
a  new  article  of  the  faith,  r  which  the  learned  amongst  your- 
selves deny :  for  the  articles  of  the  faith  cannot  increase  in 
substance,  but  only  in  explication8.  And  for  this  I  will  be 
judged  by  Bellarmine,  'who,  disputing  against  Amb.  Catharinus 

P  Resolutio  Occhami  est,  quod  nee  Nihil  transmutare,  &c.    Athan.  Epist. 

tota  ecclesia,  nee   concilium   generate,  ad  Jovin.  de  Fide. 

nee  summus  pontifex  potest  facere  arti-          r  Occham.  Almain.  in  3.  Sent.  d.  25. 

culum,  quod  non  fuit  articulus.    Sed  in  q.  i. 

dubiis    propositionibus    potest    ecclesia          s  Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  i.  Ar.  7.  C. 
determinare,    an    sint    catholicae,    &c.          t  Fides  divina  non  ideo  habet  certitu- 

Tameii  sit  determinando  non  facit  quod  dinem,  quia  toti  ecclesiae  communis  est : 

sint  catholicaj,  quum  prius  essent  ante  sed  quia  nititur  authoritate  Dei,  qui  nee 

ecclesiae  determinationem,  &c.  Almain.  falli   nee  fallere  potest,  quum  sit  ipsa 

in  3.  d.  25.  q.  r.  veritas.  lib.  3.  de  Justif.  c.  3.  §.  Quod 

q  Regula  fidei  una  omnino  est,  sola  vero  concilium. 

ilia  immobilis,  et  irreformabilis.  Tertul.          Probatio   ecclesiae   facit  ut   omnibus 

de  Virg.  vel.  cap.  i.     In  hac  fide,  &c.  innotescat  objectum  (fidei  divinae)  esse 


24  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  about  the  certainty  of  faith,  tells  us,  "that  divine  faith  hath 
not  its  certainty  because  it  is  catholic,  i.  e.  common  to  the 
whole  church,  but  because  it  builds  on  the  authority  of  God, 
who  is  truth  itself,  and  can  neither  deceive  nor  be  deceived." 
And  he  adds,  "  that  the  probation  of  the  church  can  make  it 
known  to  all,  that  the  object  of  divine  faith  is  revealed  from 
God,  and  therefore  certain,  and  not  to  be  doubted ;  but  the 
church  can  add  no  certainty,  no  firmness  to  the  word  of  God, 
revealing  it. 

VI. — Nor  is  this  hard  to  be  further  proved  out  of  your  own 
school;  for  uScotus  professeth  it  in  this  very  particular  of 
the  Greek  church :  "If  there  be,"  saith  he,  "a  true  real  dif- 
ference between  the  Greeks  and  the  Latins  about  the  point 
of  the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  then  either  they  or  we 
be  vere  hceretici,  truly  and  indeed  heretics."  And  he  speaks 
this  of  the  old  Greeks  long  before  any  decision  of  the  church 
in  this  controversy :  for  his  instance  is  in  St.  Basil  and  Greg. 
Nazianz.  on  the  one  side,  and  St.  Hierome,  Augustine,  and 
Ambrose  on  the  other.  "  And  who  dares  call  any  of  these 
heretics  f  is  his  challenge.  I  deny  not  but  that  Scotus  adds 
there,  that  howsoever  this  was  before,  yet  ex  quo,  from  the 
time  that  the  catholic  church  declared  it,  it  is  to  be  held  as 
of  the  substance  of  faith.  But  this  cannot  stand  with  his 
former  principle,  if  he  intend  by  it,  that  whatsoever  the 
church  defines  shall  be  ipso  facto,  and  for  that  determination's 
sake,  fundamental.  For  if  before  the  determination  (sup- 
posing the  difference  real)  some  of  those  worthies  were  truly 
heretics,  (as  he  confesses,)  then  somewhat  made  them  so. 
And  that  could  not  be  the  decree  of  the  church,  which  then 
was  not:  therefore  it  must  be  somewhat  really  false  that 
made  them  so ;  and  fundamentally  false,  if  it  made  them 
heretics  against  the  foundation.  But  Scotus  was  wiser  than 
to  intend  this.  It  may  be  he  saw  the  stream  too  strong  for 
him  to  swim  against,  therefore  he  went  on  with  the  doctrine 
of  the  time,  "  that  the  churches  sentence  is  of  the  substance 
of  faith ;"  but  meant  not  to  betray  the  truth :  for  he  goes  no 
further  than  eccle&ia  declaramt,  since  the  church  hath  declared 
it,  which  is  the  word  that  is  used  by  divers x. 

revelatum  a  Deo,  et  propter  hoc  certum     ibid.  §.  At  inquit. 

et  indubitatum ;  non  autem  tribuit  fir-         u  Scotus  in  i  Sent.  d.  n.  q.  I. 

mitatem    verbo  Dei  aliquid  revelantis.         x  Bellarm.  lib.  i.  de  Cone.  Auth.  c. 

Fisher  ike  Jesuit.  25 

VII. — Now  the  7  master  teaches,  and  the  z  scholars  too,  Sect.  10. 
that  every  thing  which  belongs  to  the  exposition  or  declara- 
tion of  another  intus  est,  is  not  another  contrary  thing,  but  is 
contained  within  the  bowels  and  nature  of  that  which  is  in- 
terpreted, from  which,  if  the  declaration  depart,  it  is  faulty 
and  erroneous ;  because,  instead  of  declaring,  it  gives  another 
and  contrary  a  sense.  Therefore,  when  the  church  declares 
any  thing  in  a  council,  either  that  which  she  declares  was 
intus  or  extra,  in  the  nature  and  verity  of  the  thing,  or  out 
of  it.  If  it  were  extra,  without  the  nature  of  the  thing 
declared,  then  the  declaration  of  the  thing  is  false,  and  so, 
far  from  being  fundamental  in  the  faith b.  If  it  were  intus, 
within  the  compass  and  nature  of  the  thing,  though  not  open 
and  apparent  to  every  eye,  then  the  declaration  is  true,  but 
not  otherwise  fundamental  than  the  thing  is  which  is  de- 
clared :  for  that  which  is  intus  cannot  be  larger  or  deeper 
than  that  in  which  it  is;  if  it  were,  it  could  not  be  intus. 
Therefore  nothing  is  simply  fundamental  because  the  church 
declares  it,  but  because  it  is  so  in  the  nature  of  the  thing 
which  the  church  declares. 

VIII. — And  it  is  a  slight  and  poor  evasion  that  is  com- 
monly used,  that  the  declaration  of  the  church  makes  it  fun- 
damental quoad  nos,  in  respect  of  us;  for  it  doth  not  that 
neither :  for  no  respect  to  us  can  vary  the  foundation.  The 
church's  declaration  can  bind  us  to  peace  and  external  obe- 
dience, where  there  is  not  express  letter  of  scripture  and 
sense  agreed  on ;  but  it  cannot  make  any  thing  fundamental 
to  us  that  is  not  so  in  it  sown  nature.  For  if  the  church 
can  so  add  that  it  can  by  a  declaration  make  a  thing  to  be  ^ 

12.  Concilia  cum  definiunt,  non  faciunt  de  fide,  etsi  non  ita  declarata.    Scotus 

aliquid    esse    infallibilis   veritatis,    sed  in  I.  d.  1 1.  q.  I.  in  fine.    Haeretici  multa 

declarant.  Explicare,  Bonavent.  in  I.  d.  quae  erant  implicita  fidei  nostrae  com- 

n.  A.  i.  q.  i.  ad  finem.  Explanare,  de-  pulerunt  explicare.   Bonavent.  in  i.  d. 

clarare.  Thorn,  i.  q.  36.  A.  2.  ad.  2.  et  2.  n.  A.  i.  Q.  i.  ad  finem.  Tho.  i.  q.  36. 

2.  q.  r.  A.  10.  ad.  i.  A.  2.  ad.  2.     Quamvis  apostolica  sedes, 

Quid   unquam   aliud  (ecclesia)  con-  ant  generale  concilium  de  haeresi  cen- 

ciliorum  decretis  enisa  est,  nisi  ut  quod  sere  possit,  non  tamen  ideo  assertio  ali- 

antea  simpliciter  credebatur,  hoc  idem  qua  erit  haeresis,  quia  ecclesia  definivit, 

postea  diligentius  crederetur.  Vin.  Linn,  sed  quia  fidei  catholicae  repugnat.     Ec- 

cont.  haer.  c.  32.  clesia  siquidem  sua  definitione  non  facit 

y  Sent.  i.  D.  ii.  talem  assertionem  esse  haeresin,  quum 

z  Alb.  Mag.  in  i.  Sent.  D.  n.  Art.  7.  etiamsi  ipsa  non  definivisset,  esset  hse- 

a  Hoc  semper,  nee  quicquam   prae-  resis ;  sed  id  efficit  ut  pateat,  &c.     Al- 

terea.  Vin.  Lirin.  0.32.  phon.  a  Castro,  lib.  i.  advers.   hares. 

b  In  nova  haeresi  veritas  prius  erat  c.  8.  fol.  2 1 .  D. 

26  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  fundamental  in  the  faith  that  was  not,  then  it  can  take  a 
thing  away  from  the  foundation,  and  make  it,  by  declaring, 
not  to  be  fundamental ;  which  all  men  grant  no  power  of  the 
church  can  do.  "  dFor  the  power  of  adding  any  thing  con- 
trary, and  of  detracting  any  thing  necessary,  are  alike  for- 
bidden V  and  alike  denied.  Now  nothing  is  more  apparent 
than  this  to  the  eye  of  all  men,  that  the  church  of  Rome 
hath  determined,  or  declared,  or  defined  (call  it  what  you 
will)  very  many  things  that  are  not  in  their  own  nature 
fundamental,  and  therefore  neither  are  nor  can  be  made  so 
by  her  adjudging  them.  Now  to  all  this  discourse,  that  the 
church  hath  not  power  to  make  any  thing  fundamental  in  the 
faith  that  intrinsically  and  in  its  own  nature  is  not  such, 
A.  C.  is  content  to  say  nothing. 

IX. — 2.  For  the  second,  "  That  it  is  proved  by  this  place 
of  St.  Augustine,  That  all  points  defined  by  the  church  are 
fundamental.1"  You  might  have  given  me  that  place  cited  in 
the  margin,  and  eased  my  pains  to  seek  it;  but  it  may  be 
there  was  somewhat  in  concealing  it ;  for  you  do  so  extraor- 
dinarily right  this  place,  that  you  were  loath  (I  think)  any 
body  should  see  how  you  wrong  it.  The  place  of  St.  Augustine 
is  this,  against  the  Pelagians,  about  remission  of  original  sin 
in  infants  :  "  f  This  is  a  thing  founded :  an  erring  disputer  is 
to  be  borne  with  in  other  questions  not  diligently  digested, 
not  yet  made  firm  by  full  authority  of  the  church ;  their  error 
is  to  be  borne  with,  but  it  ought  not  to  go  so  far  that  it 
should  labour  to  shake  the  foundation  itself  of  the  church." 
This  is  the  place :  but  it  can  never  follow  out  of  this  place 
(I  think)  that  every  thing  defined  by  the  church  is  funda- 

X. — For,  first,  he  speaks  of  a  foundation  of  doctrine  in 
scripture,  not  a  church-definition.  This  appears :  for,  few 
lines  before,  he  tells  us,  "s  There  was  a  question  moved  to 
St.  Cyprian,  whether  baptism  was  concluded  to  the  eighth 
day,  as  well  as  circumcision  ?  And  no  doubt  was  made  then 

d  Ecclesia  non    amputat   necessaria,  dus  est  disputator  errans :  ibi  ferendus 

non  apponit  snperflua.  Vin.  Lirin.  c.  32.  est  error,  non  tantum  progredi  debet, 

e  Deut.  iv.  2.  ut  etiam  fundamentum  ipsum  ecclesiae 

f  Fundata  res  est.     In  aliis  qusestio-  quatere  moliatur.  August.  Serm.  14.  de 

nibus  non  diligenter  digestis,  nondum  verb,  apost.  c.  12. 

plena  ecclesiae  authoritate  firmatis  feren-  s  Ibid.  c.  20. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  27 

of  the  h  beginning  of  sin;  and  that,  'out  of  this  thing,  about  Sect.  10. 
which  no  question  was  moved,  that  question  that  was  made 
was  answered.11  And  again;  "kThat  St.  Cyprian  took  that, 
which  he  gave  in  answer  from  the  foundation  of  the  church, 
to  confirm  a  stone  that  was  shaking."  Now  St.  Cyprian,  in 
all  the  answer  that  he  gives,  hath  not  one  word  of  any  defini- 
tion of  the  church :  therefore  ea  res,  that  thing  by  which  he 
answered,  was  a  foundation  of  prime  and  settled  scripture- 
doctrine,  not  any  definition  of  the  church :  therefore,  that 
which  he  took  out  of  the  foundation  of  the  church,  to  fasten 
the  stone  that  shook,  was  not  a  definition  of  the  church,  but 
the  foundation  of  the  church  itself,  the  scripture,  upon  which 
it  is  builded ;  as  appeareth  in  the  l  Milevitan  council,  where 
the  rule  by  which  Pelagius  was  condemned  is  the  rule  of 
m  scripture.  Therefore  St.  Augustine  goes  on  in  the  same 
sense,  that  the  disputer  is  not  to  be  borne  any  longer,  that 
"  "shall  endeavour  to  shake  the  foundation  itself  upon  which 
the  whole  church  is  grounded." 

XL — Secondly,  if  St.  Augustine  did  mean  \>y  fawndtd,  and 
foundation,  the  definition  of  the  church,  because  of  these  words, 
"  This  thing  is  founded,  this  is  made  firm  by  full  authority  of 
the  church ;"  and  the  words  following  these,  "  to  shake  the 
foundation  of  the  church  ;"  yet  it  can  never  follow,  out  of  any 
or  all  these  circumstances,  (and  these  are  all,)  that  all  points 
defined  by  the  church  are  fundamental  in  the  faith.  For, 
first,  no  man  denies  but  the  church  is  a  foundation,  that 
things  defined  by  it  are  founded  upon  it;  and  yet  hence  it 
cannot  follow  that  the  thing  that  is  so  founded  is  fundamental 
in  the  faith  :  for  things  may  be  "  P  founded  upon  human 
authority,"  and  be  very  certain,  yet  not  fundamental  in  the 
faith.  Nor  yet  can  it  follow,  "  This  thing  is  founded,  there- 
fore every  thing  determined  by  the  church  is  founded."  Again, 
that  which  follows,  that  those  things  are  not  to  be  opposed 
which  are  made  firm  by  full  authority  of  the  church,  cannot 
conclude  they  are  therefore  fundamental  in  the  faith :  for  full 

h  Origine  peccati.  m  Rom.  v.  15. 

i  Ex  ea  re,  unde  nulla  erat  quaestio,  n  Ut  fundamentura   ipsura  ecclesiae 

soluta  est  exorta  quaestio.  quatere  moliatur. 

k  Hoc  de  fundamento  ecclesiae  sump-  o  i  Tim.  iii.  15. 

sit  ad  confirmandum  lapidem  nutantem.  P  Mos  fundatissimus.   S.  August,  ep. 

1  Concil.  Milevit.  c.  2.  28. 

28  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  church-authority  (always  the  time  that  included  the  holy 
apostles  being  passed  by,  and  not  comprehended  in  it)  is  but 
church-authority ;  and  church-authority,  when  it  is  at  full 
sea,  is  not  q  simply  divine,  therefore  the  sentence  of  it  not 
fundamental  in  the  faith.  And  yet  no  erring  disputer  may 
be  endured  to  "  shake  the  foundation'1  which  the  church  in 
council  lays.  But  plain  scripture,  with  evident  sense,  or  a  full 
demonstrative  argument,  must  have  room,  where  a  wrangling 
and  erring  disputer  may  not  be  allowed  it.  And  there  is 
r  neither  of  these  but  may  convince  the  definition  of  the 
council,  if  it  be  ill  founded.  And  the  articles  of  the  faith 
may  easily  prove  it  is  not  fundamental,  if  indeed  and  verily  it 
be  not  so. 

XII. — And  I  have  read  somebody  that  says,  (is  it  not 
you  ?)  that  things  are  fundamental  in  the  faith  two  ways : 
one,  in  their  matter,  such  as  are  all  things  which  be  so  in 
themselves ;  the  other,  in  the  manner,  such  as  are  all  things 
that  the  church  hath  defined  and  determined  to  be  of  faith : 
and  that  so  some  things  that  are  de  modo,  of  the  manner  of 
being,  are  of  faith.  But,  in  plain  truth,  this  is  no  more  than 
if  you  should  say,  some  things  are  fundamental  in  the  faith, 
and  some  are  not.  For,  wrangle  while  you  will,  you  shall 
never  be  able  to  prove  that  any  thing  which  is  but  de  modo, 
a  consideration  of  the  manner  of  being  only,  can  possibly  be 
fundamental  in  the  faith. 

XIII. — And  since  you  make  such  a  foundation  of  this  place, 
I  will  a  little  view  the  mortar  with  which  it  is  laid  by  you. 
It  is  a  venture  but  I  shall  find  it s  untempered.  Your  assertion 
is,  "  All  points  defined  by  the  church  are  fundamental. "  Your 
proof,  this  place ;  "  Because  that  is  not  to  be  shaken  which 
is  settled  by  tfull  authority  of  the  church."  Then  (it  seems) 
your  meaning  is,  that  this  point  there  spoken  of,  u  the  remis- 
sion of  original  sin  in  baptism  of  infants,"  was  defined,  when 
St.  Augustine  wrote  this,  by  a  full  sentence  of  a  general 
council.  First,  if  you  say  it  was,  u  Bellarmine  will  tell  you  it 

q  Stapleton.    Relect.   cont.   4.    q.  3.  apertissimum  in  evangelic.   S.  August. 

Art.  I.  cont.  Fund.  c.  4. 

r  Quae  quidem,  si  tarn  manifesta  mon-         s  Ezek.  xiii.  1 1. 
stratur,  ut  in  dubium  venire  noil  possit,         t  Plena  ecclesiae  authoritate. 
praeponenda  est  omnibus  illis  rebus,  qui-         u  De  Author.  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  5.  §.  A 

bus  in  catholica  teneor.     Ita  si  aliquid  solis  particularibus. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  29 

is  false ;  and  that  the  Pelagian  heresy  was  never  condemned  Sect.  10. 
in  an  oecumenical  council,  but  only  in  nationals.  But  Bellar- 
mine  is  deceived:  for  while  the  Pelagians  stood  out  impu- 
dently against  national  councils,  some  of  them  defended  Nes- 
torius ;  which  gave  occasion  to  the  first  x  Ephesine  council  to 
excommunicate  and  depose  them.  And  yet  this  will  not  serve 
your  turn  for  this  place ;  for  St.  Augustine  was  then  dead, 
and  therefore  could  not  mean  the  sentence  of  that  council  in 
this  place.  Secondly,  if  you  say  it  was  not  then  defined  in 
an  oecumenical  synod,  plena  authoritas  ecclesice,  "  the  full 
authority  of  the  church"  there  mentioned,  doth  not  stand 
properly  for  the  decree  of  an  oacumenical  council,  but  for 
some  national ;  as  this  was  condemned  in  a  y  national  council : 
and  then,  the  full  authority  of  the  church  here  is  no  more 
than  the  full  authority  of  the  church  of  zAfric.  And  I  hope 
that  authority  doth  not  make  all  points  defined  by  it  to  be 
fundamental.  You  will  say,  Yes,  if  that  council  be  confirmed 
by  the  pope.  And  then  I  must  ever  wonder  why  St.  Augus- 
tine should  say  "  the  full  authority  of  the  church,"  and  not 
bestow  one  word  upon  the  pope,  by  whose  authority  only  that 
council,  as  all  other,  have  their  fulness  of  authority  in  your 
judgment :  an  inexpiable  omission,  if  this  doctrine  concerning 
the  pope  were  true. 

XIV. — But  here  A.  0.  steps  in  again  to  help  the  Jesuit ;  A.  C.  p.  45. 
and  he  tells  us,  over  and  over  again,  "  That  all  points  made 
firm  by  full  authority  of  the  church  are  fundamental :"  so,  firm 
he  will  have  them,  and  therefore  fundamental.  But  I  must 
tell  him,  that,  first,  it  is  one  thing  in  nature,  and  religion  too, 
to  be  firm,  and  another  thing  to  be  fundamental :  these  two 
are  not  convertible.  It  is  true  that  every  thing  that  is  funda- 
mental is  firm ;  but  it  doth  not  follow  that  every  thing  that  %/" 
is  firm  is  fundamental.  For  many  a  superstructure  is  exceed- 
ing firm,  being  fast  and  close  joined  to  a  sure  foundation; 
which  yet  no  man  will  grant  is  fundamental.  Besides,  what- 
soever is  fundamental  in  the  faith  is  fundamental  to  the 
church,  which  is  one  by  the  a  unity  of  faith.  Therefore,  if 
every  thing  defined  by  the  church  be  fundamental  in  the 

x  Can-  i.  et  4.  was  but  a  provincial  of  Numidia,  not  a 

y  Concil.  Milevit.  can.  2.  plenary  of  Afric. 

z  Nay,  if  your  own  Capellus  be  true,  a  A   fide  enim  una  ecclesia  dicitur 

(De  Appel.  Eccl.  Afric.  c.  2.  n.  5.)  it  una.   Almain.  in  3.  Sent.  Dist.  25.  q.  i. 

30  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  faith ,  then  the  church's  definition  is  the  church's  foundation. 
And  so  upon  the  matter  the  church  can  lay  her  own  founda- 
tion ;  and  then  the  church  must  be  in  absolute  and  perfect 
being  before  so  much  as  her  foundation  is  laid.  Now  this  is 
so  absurd  for  any  man  of  learning  to  say,  that  by  and  by 
after  A.  C.  is  content  to  affirm,  not  only  that  the  prima  credi- 
bilia,  the  articles  of  faith,  "  but  all  which  so  pertains  to  super- 
natural, divine,  and  infallible  Christian  faith,  as  that  thereby 
Christ  doth  dwell  in  our  hearts,  &c.  is  the  foundation  of  the 
church  under  Christ,  the  prime  foundation."  And  here  he  is 
out  again :  for,  first,  all  which  pertains  to  supernatural,  divine, 
and  infallible  Christian  faith,  is  not  by  and  by  b  fundamental 
in  the  faith  to  all  men.  And,  secondly,  the  whole  discourse 
here  is  concerning  faith,  as  it  is  taken  objective,  for  the  object 
of  faith  and  thing  to  be  believed:  but  that  faith  by  which 
Christ  is  said  to  dwell  in  our  hearts  is  taken  subjective,  for 
the  habit  and  act  of  faith.  Now,  to  confound  both  these  in 
one  period  of  speech  can  have  no  other  aim  than  to  confound 
the  reader.  But  to  come  closer  both  to  the  Jesuit  and  his 
defender,  A.  C.  If  all  points  made  firm  by  full  authority  of 
the  church  be  fundamental,  then  they  must  grant  that  every 
thing  determined  by  the  council  of  Trent  is  fundamental  in 
the  faith :  for  with  them,  it  is  firm  and  catholic  which  that 
council  decrees.  Now  that  council  decrees,  "  c  That  orders 
collated  by  the  bishop  are  not  void,  though  they  be  given 
without  the  consent  or  calling  of  the  people,  or  of  any  secular 
power :"  and  yet  they  can  produce  no  author  that  ever 
acknowledged  this  definition  of  the  council  fundamental  in  the 
faith.  It  is  true,  I  do  not  grant  that  the  decrees  of  this 
council  are  made  by  full  authority  of  the  church ;  but  they 
do  both  grant  and  maintain  it :  and  therefore  it  is  argumen- 
tum  ad  hominem,  a  good  argument  against  them,  that  a  thing 

b  Aliquid  pertinet  ad  fidem  duplici-  Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  32.  A.  4.  C.   "  There  are 

ter.     Uno  raodo  directe,  sicut  ea  quse  things  necessary  to  the  faith,  and  things 

nobis    sunt  principaliter  divinitus  tra-  which  are  but  accessory,"  &c.    Hooker, 

dita,  ut  Deum  esse   trinum,  &c.     Et  Eccl.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  3. 
circa  haec  opinari  falsum  hoc  ipso  indu-         c  Si  quis  dixerit  ordines  ab  episcopis 

cit  haeresin,  &c.     Alio  modo  indirecte.  collates  sine  populi  vel  potestatis  ssecu- 

Ex  quibus  consequitur  aliquid  contra-  laris  consensu  ant  vocatione  irritos  esse ; 

rium  fidei,  &c.    Et  in  his  aliquis  potest  anathema   sit.      Cone.  Trid.    Sess.   23. 

falsum  opinari  absque  periculo  haeresis,  can.  7. 
donee   sequela   ilia  ei   innotescat,    &c. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  31 

so  defined  may  be  firm,  for  so  this  is,  and  yet  not  funda-  Sect.  10. 
mental,  for  so  this  is  not. 

XV.— But  A.  C.  tells  us  further,  "That  if  one  may  deny  A.  C.  P.  45- 
or  doubtfully  dispute  against  any  one  determination  of  the 
church,  then  he  may  against  another,  and  another,  and  so 
against  all;  since  all  are  made  firm  to  us  by  one  and  the 
same  divine  revelation,  sufficiently  applied  by  one  and  the 
same  full  authority  of  the  church ;  which  being  weakened  in 
any  one  cannot  be  firm  in  any  other.1'  First,  A.  C.  might 
have  acknowledged  that  he  borrowed  the  former  part  of  this 
out  of  d  Vincentius  Lirinensis.  And  as  that  learned  Father 
uses  it  I  subscribe  to  it,  but  not  as  A.  C.  applies  it :  for  Vin- 
centius speaks  there  de  catholico  dogmate,  of  catholic  maxims ; 
and  A.  C.  will  force  it  to  every  determination  of  the  church. 
Now  catholic  maxims,  which  are  properly  fundamental,  are  §.38.  n.  21. 
certain  prime  truths  deposited  with  the  church,  and  not  so 
much  determined  by  the  church  as  published  and  manifested, 
and  so  made  firm  by  her  to  us.  For  so  e  Vincentius  ex- 
pressly. Where  all  that  the  church  doth  is  but  ut  hoc  idem 
quod  antea,  that  the  same  thing  may  be  believed  which  was 
before  believed,  but  with  more  light  and  clearness,  and  (in 
that  sense)  with  more  firmness  than  before.  Now  in  this 
sense  give  way  to  a  disputator  errans,  every  cavilling  disputer, 
to  deny  or  quarrel  at  the  maxims  of  Christian  religion,  any 
one,  or  any  part  of  any  one  of  them ;  and  why  may  he  not 
then  take  liberty  to  do  the  like  of  any  other,  till  he  have 
shaken  all  ?  But  this  hinders  not  the  church  herself,  nor  any 
appointed  by  the  church,  to  examine  her  own  decrees,  and  to 
see  that  she  keep  dogmata  deposita,  the  principles  of  faith 
unblemished  and  uncorrupted.  For  if  she  do  not  so,  but  that 
fnovitia  veteribus,  new  doctrines  be  added  to  the  old,  the 
church,  which  is  sacmrium  veritatis,  the  repository  of  verity, 
may  be  changed  in  lupanar  errorurn,  (I  am  loath  to  English 
it.)  By  the  church  then  this  may,  nay,  it  ought  to  be  done ; 

d  Abdicata  enim  qualibet  parte  catho-  ut  quod   antea  simpliciter  credebatur, 

lici  dogmatis,  alia  quoque  atque  item  hoc  idem  postea  diligentius  crederetur, 

alia,  &c.     Quid  aliud  ad  extremum  se-  &c.  Vin.  Lirin.  cont.  Haeres.  c.  32. 
quetur,  nisi  ut  totum  pariter  repudie-         f  Impiorum  et  turpium  errorum  lu- 

tur?    Vin.  Lirin.  cont.  Haeres.  c.  31.  panar;    ubi  erat  ante  castae   et  incor- 

e  Ecclesia  depositorum  apud  se  dog-  ruptae  sacrarium  veritatis.    Vin.  Lirin. 

matum  custos,  &c.     Denique  quid  un-  cont.  Haeres.  0.31. 
quam  conciliorum  decretis  enisa  est,  nisi, 

32  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10.  however,  every  wrangling  disputer  may  neither  deny,  nor 
doubtfully  dispute,  much  less  obstinately  oppose  the  deter- 
minations of  the  church,  no  not  where  they  are  not  dogmata 
deposita,  these  deposited  principles.  But  if  he  will  be  so  bold 
to  deny  or  dispute  the  determinations  of  the  church,  yet 
that  may  be  done  without  shaking  the  foundation,  where  the 
determinations  themselves  belong  but  to  the  fabric,  and  not 
to  the  foundation.  For  a  whole  frame  of  building  may  be 
shaken,  and  yet  the  foundation  where  it  is  well  laid  remain 
A.  C.  p.  46.  firm.  And  therefore  after  all,  A.  C.  dares  not  say  the  foun- 
dation is  shaken,  but  only  in  a  sort.  And  then  it  is  as  true, 
that  in  a  sort  it  is  not  shaken. 

XVI. — 2.  For  the  second  part  of  his  argument,  A.  C.  must 
pardon  me  if  I  dissent  from  him.  For  first,  "  All  deter- 
minations of  the  church  are  not  made  firm  to  us  by  one  and 
the  same  divine  revelation."  For  some  determinations  of  the 
church  are  made  firm  to  us  per  chirographum  Sscripturce, 
by  the  handwriting  of  the  scripture ;  and  that  is  authentical 
indeed.  Some  other  decisions,  yea  and  of  the  church  too, 
are  made,  or  may  be  (if  h  Stapleton  inform  us  right),  without 
an  evident,  nay  without  so  much  as  a  probable  testimony 
of  holy  writ.  But  iBellarmine  falls  quite  off  in  this,  and 
confesses  in  express  terms,  "  That  nothing  can  be  certain 
by  certainty  of  faith,  unless  it  be  contained  immediately  in 
the  word  of  God,  or  be  deduced  out  of  the  word  of  God  by 
evident  consequence."  And  if  nothing  can  be  certain  but  so, 
then  certainly  no  determination  of  the  church  itself,  if  that 
determination  be  not  grounded  upon  one  of  these,  either 
express  word  of  God,  or  evident  consequence  out  of  it.  So 
here  is  little  agreement  in  this  great  point  between  Stapleton 
and  Bellarmine.  Nor  can  this  be  shifted  off,  as  if  Stapleton 
spake  of  the  word  of  God  written,  and  Bellarmine  of  the 
word  of  God  unwritten,  (as  he  calls  tradition.)  For  Bellar- 
mine treats  there  of  the  knowledge  which  a  man  hath  of  the 
certainty  of  his  own  salvation.  And  I  hope  A.  C.  will  not 
tell  us,  there  is  any  tradition  extant  unwritten  by  which  par- 

&  Vin.  Lirin.  cont.  Haeres.  c.  32.  titudine  fidei,  nisi  aut  immediate  con- 

h  Etiamsi    ntillo    scripturarum     aut  tineatur   in  verbo   Dei,   aut   ex  verbo 

evidenti  aut   probabili  testimonio,  &c.  Dei  per  evidentem  consequentiam  dedu- 

Stapleton,  Relect.  cont.  4.  q.  i.  Art.  3.  catur.     Bellarm.  lib.  iii.  de  Justificat. 

»  Non  potest  aliquid  certum  esse  cer-  c.  8.  §.  Prima  ratio. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  33 

ticular  men  may  have  assurance  of  their  several  salvations.    Sect.  10. 

Therefore  Bellarmine's  whole  disputation  there  is  quite  beside 

the  matter :  or  else  he  must  speak  of  the  written  word,  and 

so  lie  cross  to  Stapleton,  as  is  mentioned.     But  to  return. 

If  A.  C.  will,  he  may,  but  I  cannot  believe,  that  a  definition 

of  the  church  which  is  made  by  the  express  word  of  God, 

and  another  which  is  made  without  so  much  as  a  probable 

testimony  of  it,  or  a  clear  deduction  from  it,  are  made  firm 

to  us  by  one  and  the  same  divine  revelation.     Nay,  I  must 

say  in  this  case,  that  the  one  determination  is  firm  by  divine 

revelation,  but  the  other  hath  no  divine  revelation  at  all,  but 

the  churches  authority  only. 

2.  Secondly,  I  cannot  believe  neither,  "  that  all  deter- 
minations of  the  church  are  sufficiently  applied  by  one  and 
the  same  full  authority  of  the  church."  For  the  authority  of 
the  church,  though  it  be  of  the  same  fulness  in  regard  of 
itself,  and  of  the  power  which  it  commits  to  general  councils 
lawfully  called,  yet  it  is  not  always  of  the  same  fulness  of 
knowledge  and  sufficiency,  nor  of  the  same  fulness  of  con- 
science and  integrity,  to  apply  dogmata  fidei,  that  which  is 
dogmatical  in  the  faith.  For  instance,  I  think  you  dare  not 
deny  but  the  council  of  Trent  was  lawfully  called ;  and  yet 
I  am  of  opinion,  that  few,  even  of  yourselves,  believe  that  the 
council  of  Trent  hath  the  same  fulness  with  the  council  of 
Nice,  in  all  the  forenamed  kinds  or  degrees  of  fulness. 
Thirdly ;  suppose  "  that  all  determinations  of  the  church  are 
made  firm  to  us  by  one  and  the  same  divine  revelation,  and 
sufficiently  applied  by  one  and  the  same  full  authority  ;*"  yet 
it  will  not  follow  that  they  are  all  alike  fundamental  in  the 
faith.  For  I  hope  A.  C.  himself  will  not  say,  that  the  de- 
finitions of  the  church  are  in  better  condition  than  the  pro- 
positions of  canonical  scripture.  Now  all  propositions  of 
canonical  scripture  are  alike  firm,  because  they  all  alike  pro- 
ceed from  divine  revelation ;  but  they  are  not  all  alike  fun- 
damental in  the  faith.  For  this  proposition  of  Christ  to  St. 
Peter  and  St.  Andrew,  Follow  me,  and  I  will  make  you  fishers 
ofmenk,  is  as  firm  a  truth  as  that  which  he  delivered  to  his 
disciples,  That  he  must  die,  and  rise  again  the  third  day1 ;  for 

k  Matt.  iv.  19.  i  Matt.  xvi.  21. 

34  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  10,  n.  both  proceed  from  the  same  divine  revelation,  out  of  the 
mouth  of  our  Saviour ;  and  both  are  sufficiently  applied  by 
one  and  the  same  full  authority  of  the  church,  which  receives 
the  whole  Gospel  of  St.  Matthew  to  be  canonical  and  infallible 
scripture.  And  yet  both  these  propositions  of  Christ  are  not 
alike  fundamental  in  the  faith.  For  I  dare  say  no  man  shall 
be  saved  (in  the  ordinary  way  of  salvation)  that  believes  not 
the  death  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  And  I  believe 
A.  C.  dares  not  say  that  no  man  shall  be  saved  into  whose 
capacity  it  never  came  that  Christ  made  St.  Peter  and 
Andrew  fishers  of  men.  And  yet  should  he  say  it,  nay, 
should  he  shew  it  sub  annulo  piscatoris,  no  man  will  believe 
it  that  hath  not  made  shipwreck  of  his  common  notions. 
Now  if  it  be  thus  between  proposition  and  proposition  is- 
suing out  of  Christ's  own  mouth,  I  hope  it  may  well  be  so 
also  between  even  just  and  true  determinations  of  the  church  ; 
that  supposing  them  alike  true  and  firm,  yet  they  shall  not 
be  alike  fundamental  to  all  men's  belief. 

$.  Secondly,  I  required  to  know  what  points  the  bishop 
would  account  fundamental.  He  said,  all  the  points  of 
the  Creed  were  such. 

Sec.  n.  33.  I. — Against  this  I  hope  you  except  not.  For  since 
the  m  Fathers  make  the  Creed  the  rule  of  faith ;  n  since  the 
agreeing  sense  of  scripture  with  those  articles  are  the  two 
regular  precepts  by  which  a  divine  is  governed  about  the 
faith  ;  since  your  own  council  of  °  Trent  decrees,  That  it  is 
that  principle  of  faith  in  which  all  that  profess  Christ  do 
necessarily  agree,  et  fundamentum  firmum  et  unicum,  not  the 
firm  alone,  but  the  only  foundation  ;  since  it  is  excommunica- 
tion Vipso  jure  for  any  man  to  contradict  the  articles  con- 
tained in  that  Creed ;  since  the  whole  body  of  the  faith  is  so 
contained  in  the  Creed,  as  that  the  q  substance  of  it  was  be- 
lieved even  before  the  coming  of  Christ,  though  not  so  ex- 
pressly as  since  in  the  number  of  the  articles ;  since  r  Bet- 
in  Tertull.  Apol.  contra  Gentes,  c.  47.  P  Bonavent.  ibid.  Dub.  2.  et  3.  in 
de  veland.  Virg.  c.  i.  S.  Aiigust.  Serm.  literam. 

15.  de  Temp.  cap.  2.  Rufin.  in  Symb.         <1  Thom.  2.  sae.  q.  i.  Art.  7.  c. 
apud  Cyprian,  p.  357.  r  Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de  Verb.  Dei  non 

'»  Alb.  Mag.  in  i.  Sent.  D.  1 1.  A.  7.       script,  c.  1 1.  §.  Primum  est. 
0  Concil.  Trident.  Sess.  3. 

fisher  the  Jesuit.  35 

larmine  confesses,  that  all  things  simply  necessary  for  all  Sect.  n. 
men's  salvation  are  in  the  Creed  and  the  Decalogue;  what 
reason  can  you  have  to  except  ?  And  yet,  for  all  this,  every- 
thing fundamental  is  not  of  a  like  nearness  to  the  foundation, 
nor  of  equal  primeness  in  the  faith.  And  my  granting  the 
Creed  to  be  fundamental  doth  not  deny,  but  that  there  are 
squcedam  prima  credibilia,  certain  prime  principles  of  faith, 
in  the  bosom  whereof  all  other  articles  lay  wrapped  and  folded 
up.  One  of  which,  since  Christ,  is  that  of  4St.  John  ;  Every 
spirit  that  confesseth  Jesus  Christ  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God. 
And  one,  both  before  the  coming  of  Christ  and  since,  is  that 
of  St.  Paul ;  u  He  that  comes  to  God  must  believe  that  God  is, 
and  that  he  is  a  rewarder  of  them  that  seek  him. 

II. — Here  A.  C.  tells  you,  "  That  either  I  must  mean,  that  A.  C.  p.  46. 
those  points  are  only  fundamental  which  are  expressed  in 
the  Creed,  or  those  also  which  are  infolded.  If  I  say  those 
only  which  are  expressed,  then,"  saith  he,  "  to  believe  the  scrip- 
tures is  not  fundamental,  because  it  is  not  expressed.  If  I 
say  those  which  are  infolded  in  the  articles,  then  some  un- 
written church  traditions  may  be  accounted  fundamental." 
The  truth  is,  I  said,  and  say  still,  that  all  the  points  of  the 
Apostles1  Creed,  as  they  are  there  expressed,  are  fundamental. 
And  therein  I  say  no  more  than  some  of  your  best  learned 
have  said  before  me.  But  I  never  either  said,  or  meant,  that 
they  only  are  fundamental :  that  they  are  xfundamentum 
unicum,  the  only  foundation,  is  the  council  of  Trent's ;  it  is 
not  mine.  Mine  is,  "  That  the  belief  of  scripture  to  be  the 
word  of  God  and  infallible,"  is  an  equal,  or  rather  a  pre- 
ceding prime  principle  of  faith,  with  or  to  the  whole  body 
of  the  Creed.  And  this  agrees  (as  before  I  told  the  Jesuit) 
with  one  of  your  own  great  masters,  Albertus  Magnus  y ;  who 
is  not  far  from  that  proposition  in  terminis.  So  here  the 
very  foundation  of  A.  C.'s  dilemma  falls  off.  For  I  say  not, 
that  only  the  points  of  the  Creed  are  fundamental,  whether 
expressed  or  not  expressed :  that  all  of  them  are,  that  I  say. 
And  yet,  though  the  foundation  of  his  dilemma  be  fallen 

s  Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  i.  A.  7.  C.  fidei    est  concors   scripturarum   sensus 

c  i  John  iv.  2.  u  Heb.  xi.  6.  cum   articulis   fidei :  quia  illis   duobus 

*  Cone.  Trident.  Sess.  3.  regiilaribus     praeceptis    regitur     theo- 

y  In  i  Sent.  D.   u.  A.  7.     Regula  logus. 

36  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 1, 1 2.  away,  I  will  take  the  boldness  to  tell  A.  C.,  that  if  I  had  said 
that  those  articles  only  which  are  expressed  in  the  Creed  are 
fundamental,  it  would  have  been  hard  to  have  excluded  the 
scripture,  upon  which  the  Creed  itself  in  every  point  is 
grounded ;  for  nothing  is  supposed  to  shut  out  its  own  foun- 
dation. And  if  I  should  now  say  that  some  articles  are 
fundamental  which  are  infolded  in  the  Creed,  it  would  not 
follow  that  therefore  some  unwritten  traditions  were  funda- 
mental. Some  traditions  I  deny  not  true  and  firm,  and  of 
great  both  authority  and  use  in  the  church,  as  being  aposto- 
lical, but  yet  not  fundamental  in  the  faith :  and  it  would  be 
a  mighty  large  fold  which  should  lap  up  traditions  within  the 
Creed.  As  for  that  tradition,  that  the  books  of  holy  scrip- 
tures are  divine,  and  infallible  in  every  part,  I  will  handle  that 
when  I  come  to  the  z  proper  place  for  it. 

$.  I  asked,  how  then  it  happened  (as  Mr.  Rogers  saith) 
that  the  English  church  is  not  yet  resolved  what  is  the 
right  sense  of  the  article  of  Christ's  descending  into 

Sect.  i?.  9$,  I. — The  English  church  never  made  doubt  (that  I  know) 
what  was  the  sense  of  that  article.  The  words  are  so  plain, 
they  bear  their  meaning  before  them.  She  was  content  to 
put  that  a article  among  those  to  which  she  requires  subscrip- 
tion ;  not  as  doubting  of  the  sense,  but  to  prevent  the  cavils 
of  some  who  had  been  too  busy  in  crucifying  that  article,  and 
in  making  it  all  one  with  the  article  of  the  cross,  or  but  an 
exposition  of  it. 

II. — And  surely,  for  my  part,  I  think  the  church  of  Eng- 
land is  better  resolved  of  the  right  sense  of  this  article  than 
the  church  of  Home ;  especially  if  she  must  be  tried  by  her 
writers,  as  you  try  the  church  of  England  by  Mr.  Rogers : 
for  you  cannot  agree  whether  this  article  be  a  mere  tradition, 
or  whether  it  hath  any  place  of  scripture  to  warrant  it. 
bScotus  and  cStapleton  allow  it  no  footing  in  scripture;  but 
dBellarmine  is  resolute  that  this  article  is  everywhere  in 
scripture ;  and  e  Thomas  grants  as  much  for  the  whole  Creed. 

z  Sect.  1 6.  num.  i.  d  Scripturae  passim  hoc  docent.    Bel- 

a  Art.  III.  ]arm.  de  Christ,  lib.  iv.  c.  6  et  12. 

b  Scotus  in  i.  D.  ii.  q.  i.  e  Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  i.  A.  9.  ad  i. 
c  Stapleton,  Relect.  Con.  5.  q.  5.  Art.  I. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  37 

The  church  of  England  never  doubted  it ;  and  fSt.  Augustine  Sect.  12, 13. 
proves  it. 

III. — And  yet  again  you  are  different  for  the  sense  :  for  you 
agree  not  whether  the  soul  of  Christ,  in  triduo  mortis,  in  the 
time  of  his  death,  did  go  down  into  hell  really,  and  was 
present  there,  or  virtually,  and  by  effects  only:  for  s Thomas 
holds  the  first,  and  hDurand  the  latter.  Then  you  agree  not 
whether  the  soul  of  Christ  did  descend  really  and  in  essence 
into  the  lowest  pit  of  hell  and  place  of  the  damned,  as  'Bellar- 
mine  once  held  probable,  and  proved  it ;  or  really  only  into 
that  place  or  region  of  hell  which  you  call  limbum  patrum, 
and  then,  but  virtually,  from  thence  into  the  lower  hell ;  to 
which  kBellarmine  reduces  himself,  and  gives  his  reason, 
because  it  is  the  Common  opinion  of  the  school.  Now  the 
church  of  England  takes  the  words  as  they  are  in  the  Creed, 
and  believes  them  without  further  dispute,  and  in  that  sense 
which  the  ancient  primitive  Fathers  of  the  church  agreed  in. 
And  yet,  if  any  in  the  church  of  England  should  not  be 
throughly  resolved  in  the  sense  of  this  article,  is  it  not  as 
lawful  for  them  to  say,  "  I  conceive  thus  or  thus  of  it,  yet  if 
any  other  way  of  his  descent  be  found  truer  than  this,  I  deny 
it  not,  but  as  yet  I  know  no  other,'1  as  it  was  for  mDurand 
to  say  it,  and  yet  not  impeach  the  foundation  of  the  faith  \ 

•$.  The  bishop  said  that  Mr.  Rogers  was  but  a  private  man. 
But  (said  I)  if  Mr.  Rogers  (writing  as  he  did  by  public 
authority)  be  accounted  only  a  private  man, — 

i$    I. — I  said  truth  when  I  said  Mr.  Rogers  was  a  private  Sect.  13. 
man.     And  I  take  it,  you  will  not  allow  every  speech  of  every 
man,  though  allowed  by  authority  to  have  his  books  printed, 
to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Rome.     n  This  hath  been 

f  S.  August,  ep.  99.  Sent.  Dist.  22.  q.  3.  num.  9. 
e  Per  suam  esseutiam.    Thorn,  p.  3.         n  And  this  was  an  ancient  fault  too, 
q.  52.  A.  2.  C.  for  St.  Augustine  checks  at  it  in  his 
li  Durand.  in  3.  D.  11.  q.  3.  time.     Noli  colligere  calumnias  ex  epi- 
i  Bellarm.  <le  Christ,  lib.  iv.  c.  16.  scoporum  scriptis,  sive  Hilarii,  sive  Gy- 
le Bellarm.  Recog.  p.  n.  priani  et  Agrippini.     Primo,  quia  hoc 
1  Sequuntur  enim.  Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  52.  genus  literarum  ab  authoritate  canonis 
A.  2.  distinguendum  est.     Non  enim  sic  le- 
nv  Non  est  pertinaciter  asserendum,  guntur  tanquam  ita  ex  iis  testimonium 
quin  anima  Christi  per  alium  modum  proferatur,  ut  contra  sentire  non  liceat, 
nobis  ignotum  potuerit  descendere  ad  sicubi  forte  aliter  sentirent,  quam  veri- 
infernum :  nee  nos  negamus  alium  mo-  tas   postulat.     S.  August,    ep.  48,  &c. 
dum  esse  forsitaii  veriorem ;   sed  fate-  And  yet  these  were  far  greater  men  in 
mur  nos  ilium  ignorare.    Durand.  in  3.  their  generations  than  Mr.  Rogers  was. 


38  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  13.  oft  complained  of  on  both  sides — the  imposing  particular 
men's  assertions  upon  the  church — yet  I  see  you  mean  not  to 
leave  it.  And  surely,  as  controversies  are  now  handled  (by 
some  of  your  party)  at  this  day,  I  may  not  say  it  is  the  sense 
of  the  article  in  hand,  but  I  have  long  thought  it  a  kind  of 
descent  into  hell  to  be  conversant  in  them.  I  would  the 
authors  would  take  heed  in  time,  and  not  seek  to  blind  the 
people,  or  cast  a  mist  before  evident  truth,  lest  it  cause  a 
final  descent  to  that  place  of  torment.  But  since  you  will 
hold  this  course,  Stapleton  was  of  greater  note  with  you  than 
Mr.  Rogers  his  Exposition,  or  Notes  upon  the  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  is  with  us :  and  as  he,  so  his  Rejection. 
And  is  it  the  doctrine  of  the  church  of  Rome  which  Stapleton 
affirms,  "  °The  scripture  is  silent  that  Christ  descended  into 
hell,  and  that  there  is  a  catholic  and  an  apostolic  church  ?" 
If  it  be,  then  what  will  become  of  the  pope's  supremacy  over 
the  whole  church  ?  Shall  he  have  his  power  over  the  catholic 
church  given  him  expressly  in  the  scripture,  in  the  vkeys,  to 
enter,  and  in  ^pasce,  to  feed  when  he  is  in,  and  when  he  had 
fed,  to  r confirm;  and  in  all  these,  not  to  err  and  fail  in  his 
ministration  ?  and  is  the  catholic  church,  in  and  over  which 
he  is  to  do  all  these  great  things,  quite  left  out  of  the  scrip- 
ture? Belike  the  Holy  Ghost  was  careful  to  give  him  his 
power,  yes,  in  any  case,  but  left  the  assigning  of  his  great 
cure,  the  catholic  church,  to  tradition.  And  it  were  well  for 
him  if  he  could  so  prescribe  for  what  he  now  claims. 

II. — But  what  if  after  all  this  Mr.  Rogers  there  says  no 
such  thing?  as  in  truth  he  doth  not.  His  words  are,  "SA11 
Christians  acknowledge  he  descended ;  but  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  article  there  is  not  that  consent  that  were  to  be 
wished."  What  is  this  to  the  church  of  England  more  than 
others  ?  And  again,  "  Hill  we  know  the  native  and  undoubted 
sense  of  this  article."  Is  Mr.  Rogers'  "  we"  the  church  of 
England,  or  rather  his  and  some  others'  judgment  in  the 
church  of  England  ? 

A.  C.  p.  47.      III. — Now  here  A.  C.  will  have  somewhat  again  to  say, 
though,  God  knows,  it  is  to  little  purpose.     It  is,  "  That  the 

o  Stapl.  Cont.  5.  q.  5.  A.  i.  s  Rogers  in  Articulis  Eccles.  Augl. 

P  Matt.  xvL  19.  Art.  III. 
q  John  xxL  15.  1 6.  t  Ibid, 

r  Luke  xxii.  32. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  39 

Jesuit  urged  Mr.  Rogers1  book  because  it  was  set  out  by  Sect.  13. 
public  authority,  and  because  the  book  bears  the  title  of  the 
Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England."  A.  C.  may  un- 
doubtedly urge  Mr.  Rogers,  if  he  please ;  but  he  ought  not  to 
say  that  his  opinion  is  the  doctrine  of  the  church  of  England, 
for  neither  of  the  reasons  by  him  expressed.  First,  not 
because  his  book  was  publicly  allowed :  for  many  books 
among  them,  as  well  as  among  us,  have  been  printed  by 
public  authority,  as  containing  nothing  in  them  contrary  to 
faith  and  good  manners,  and  yet  containing  many  things  in 
them  of  opinion  only  or  private  judgment,  which  yet  is  far 
from  the  avowed  positive  doctrine  of  the  church,  the  church 
having  as  yet  determined  neither  way  by  open  declaration 
upon  the  words  or  things  controverted.  And  this  is  more 
frequent  among  their  schoolmen  than  among  any  of  our  con- 
troversers,  as  is  well  known.  Nor,  secondly,  because  his  book 
bears  the  title  of  the  Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land :  for  suppose  the  worst,  and  say  Mr.  Rogers  thought  a 
little  too  well  of  his  own  pains,  and  gave  his  book  too  high  a 
title ;  is  his  private  judgment  therefore  to  be  accounted  the 
catholic  doctrine  of  the  church  of  England  ?  Surely  no ;  no 
more  than  I  should  say,  every  thing  said  by  u  Thomas  or 
xBonaventure  is  angelical  or  seraphical  doctrine,  because  one 
of  these  is  styled  in  the  church  of  Rome  seraphical,  and  the 
other  angelical  doctor.  And  yet  their  works  are  printed  by 
public  authority,  and  that  title  given  them. 

IV. — "  Yea,  but  our  private  authors,"  saith  A.  C.,  "  are  not  A.  C.  p.  47. 
allowed  (for  aught  I  know)  in  such  a  like  sort  to  express  our 
catholic  doctrine  in  any  matter  subject  to  question."  Here 
are  two  limitations  which  will  go  far  to  bring  A.  C.  off, 
whatsoever  I  shall  say  against  him :  for,  first,  let  me  instance 
in  any  private  man  that  takes  as  much  upon  him  as  Mr.  Rogers 
doth,  he  will  say  he  knew  it  not,  his  assertion  here  being  no 
other  than  "  for  aught  he  knows."  Secondly,  if  he  be  unwilling 
to  acknowledge  so  much,  yet  he  will  answer,  It  is  not  just  in 
such  a  like  sort  as  Mr.  Rogers  doth  it,  that  is,  perhaps,  it  is 
not  the  very  title  of  his  book.  But  well  then ;  is  there  never 
a  private  man  allowed  in  the  church  of  Rome  to  express  your 

u  Angelici  D.  S.  Thorn,  summa.  vent.  Doctoris  Seraphici  in  lib.  iii.  Sent. 

x  Celebratissimi  Patris  Dom.  Bona-     Disputat. ' 

40  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  13, 14.  catholic  doctrine  in  any  matter  subject  to  question  ?  What ! 
not  in  any  matter?  Were  not  Vega  and  Soto  two  private 
men  ?  Is  it  not  a  matter  subject  to  question,  to  great  question 
in  these  days,  whether  a  man  may  be  certain  of  his  being  in 
the  state  of  salvation,  certitudine  Jidei,  by  the  certainty  of 
faith?  Doth  not  yBellarmine  make  it  a  controversy?  and  is 
it  not  a  part  of  your  catholic  faith,  if  it  be  determined  in  the 
z council  of  Trent?  And  yet  these  two  great  friars  of  their 
time,  Dominions  Soto  and  Andreas  Vegaa,  were  of  contrary 
opinions,  and  both  of  them  challenged  the  decree  of  the 
council;  and  so,  consequently,  your  catholic  faith  to  be  as 
each  of  them  concluded :  and  both  of  them  wrote  books  to 
maintain  their  opinions,  and  both  of  their  books  were  pub- 
lished by  authority.  And  therefore  I  think  it  is  allowed  in 
the  church  of  Rome  to  private  men  to  express  your  catholic 
doctrine,  and  in  a  matter  subject  to  question.  And  therefore 
also,  if  another  man  in  the  church  of  England  should  be  of 
a  contrary  opinion  to  Mr.  Eogers,  and  declare  it  under  the 
title  of  the  catholic  doctrine  of  the  church  of  England,  this 
were  no  more  than  Soto  and  Vega  did  in  the  church  of  Rome. 

A.  c.  p.  47.  And  I,  for  my  part,  cannot  but  wonder  A.  C.  should  not  know 
it ;  for  he  says  that,  for  aught  he  knows,  private  men  are  not 
allowed  so  to  express  their  catholic  doctrine.  And  in  the 
same  question  both  Catharinus  and  b  Bellarmine  take  on  them 
to  express  your  catholic  faith,  the  one  differing  from  the  other 
almost  as  much  as  Soto  and  Vega,  and  perhaps  in  some 
respect  more. 

$,  But  if  Mr.  Rogers  be  only  a  private  man,  in  what  book 
may  we  find  the  protestamV  public  doctrine  ?  The  bishop 
answered  that  to  the  Book  of  Articles  they  were  all 
sworn, — 

Sect.  14.  23.  I. — What !  was  I  so  ignorant  to  say  the  articles  of  the 
church  of  England  were  the  public  doctrine  of  all  the  pro- 
testants  ?  or  that  all  the  protestants  were  sworn  to  the  arti- 
cles of  the  church  of  England,  as  this  speech  seems  to  imply  ? 
Sure  I  was  not.  Was  not  the  immediate  speech  before  of 

y  Bellarm.  de  Justific.  lib.  iii.  c,  I  et  1 4.  concilii  Tridentini. 

z  Huic  concilio  catholic!  omnes  inge-         a  Hist.  Concil.  Trident,  lib.  ii.  p.  245. 

ilia   sua   et  judicia    spoil te   subjiciunt.  edit.  Lat.  Leidae,  1622. 
Bellarm.  de  Justific.  lib.  iii.  c.  3.  §.  Sed         b  Bellarm.  de  Justific.  lib.  iii.  c.  3. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  41 

the  church  of  England  2  and  how  comes  the  subject  of  the  Sect.  14. 
speech  to  be  varied  in  the  next  lines  ?  Nor  yet  speak  I  this 
as  if  other  protestants  did  not  agree  with  the  church  of 
England  in  the  chiefest  doctrines,  and  in  the  main  exceptions 
which  they  jointly  take  against  the  Roman  church ;  as  ap- 
pears by  their  several  confessions.  But  if  A.  C.  will  say  A.  C.  p.  47. 
(as  he  doth),  "  That  because  there  was  speech  before  of  the 
church  of  England,  the  Jesuit  understood  me  in  a  limited 
sense,  and  meant  only  the  protestants  of  the  English  church ;" 
be  it  so  ;  there  is  no  great  harm  done  cbut  this,  that  the 
Jesuit  offers  to  inclose  me  too  much.  For  I  did  not  say  that 
the  book  of  articles  only  was  the  continent  of  the  church  of 
England's  public  doctrine  :  she  is  not  so  narrow,  nor  hath 
she  purpose  to  exclude  any  thing  which  she  acknowledges 
hers ;  nor  doth  she  wittingly  permit  any  crossing  of  her 
public  declarations;  yet  she  is  not  such  a  shrew  to  her 
children  as  to  deny  her  blessing,  or  denounce  an  anathema 
against  them,  if  some  peaceably  dissent  in  some  particulars 
remoter  from  the  foundation,  as  your  own  schoolmen  differ. 
And  if  the  church  of  Rome,  since  she  grew  to  her  greatness, 
had  not  been  so  fierce  in  this  course,  and  too  particular 
in  determining  too  many  things,  and  making  them  matters 
of  necessary  belief,  which  had  gone  for  many  hundreds  of 
years  before  only  for  things  of  pious  opinion,  Christendom 
(I  persuade  myself)  had  been  in  happier  peace  at  this  day 
than  (I  doubt)  we  shall  ever  live  to  see  it. 

II. — Well ;  but  A.  C.  will  prove  the  church  of  England  a  A.  C.  p.  48. 
shrew,  and  such  a  shrew ;  for,  in  her  Book  dof  Canons,  she 
excommunicates  every  man  who  shall  hold  any  thing  con- 
trary to  any  part  of  the  said  articles.  So  A.  C.  But  surely, 
these  are  not  the  very  words  of  the  canon  ;  nor,  perhaps,  the 
sense.  Not  the  words  ;  for  they  are,  "  Whosoever  shall  affirm 
that  the  articles  are  in  any  part  superstitious  or  erroneous,1' 
&c.  And  perhaps  not  the  sense;  for  it  is  one  thing  for  a 
man  to  hold  an  opinion  privately  within  himself,  and  another 
thing  boldly  and  publicly  to  affirm  it.  And  again,  it  is  one 
thing  to  hold  contrary  to  some  part  of  an  article,  which,  per- 
haps, may  be  but  in  the  manner  of  expression ;  and  another 

c  And  therefore  A.  C.  needs  not  make  such  a  noise  about  it  as  he  doth, 
p.  48.  d  Can.  5. 

42  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  14, 1 5.  thing  positively  to  affirm,  that  the  articles,  in  any  part  of 
them,  are  superstitious  and  erroneous.  But  this  is  not  the 
main  of  the  business :  for  though  the  church  of  England  de- 
nounce excommunication,  as  is  before  expressed,  yet  she  comes 
far  short  of  the  church  of  Rome's  severity ;  whose  anathe- 
mas are  not  only  for  thirty-nine  articles,  but  for  very  many 
more,  fabove  one  hundred  in  matters  of  doctrine ;  and  that, 
in  many  points,  as  far  remote  from  the  foundation,  though 
to  the  far  greater  rack  of  men's  consciences,  they  must  be  all 

A.  C.  p.  45.  made  fundamental,  if  that  church  have  once  determined 
them  :  whereas  the  church  of  England  never  declared  that 
every  one  of  her  articles  are  fundamental  in  the  faith.  For 
it  is  one  thing  to  say  no  one  of  them  is  superstitious  or  erro- 
neous, and  quite  another  to  say  every  one  of  them  is  funda- 
mental, and  that  in  every  part  of  it,  to  all  men's  belief. 
Besides,  the  church  of  England  prescribes  only  to  her  own 
children,  and,  by  those  articles,  provides  but  for  her  own 
peaceable  consent  in  those  doctrines  of  truth ;  but  the  church 
of  Rome  severely  imposes  her  doctrine  upon  the  whole  world 
under  pain  of  damnation. 

,$.  And  that  the  scriptures  only,  not  any  unwritten  tradi- 
tion, was  the  foundation  of  their  faith. 

Sect.  15.  3$.  I. — The  church  of  England  grounded  her  positive  arti- 
cles upon  scripture ;  and  her  negative  do  refute  there,  where 
the  thing  affirmed  by  you  is  not  affirmed  by  scripture,  nor 
directly  to  be  concluded  out  of  it.  And  here,  not  the  church 
of  England  only,  but  all  protestants  agree  most  truly  and 
most  strongly  in  this,  That  the  scripture  is  sufficient  to 
salvation,  and  contains  in  it  all  things  necessary  to  it.  The 
Fathers  s  are  plain ;  the  h  schoolmen  not  strangers  in  it :  and 

e  Can.  5.  f  Concil.  Trident.  Verbo  Dei  non  scripto,  cap.  n,  saith, 

g  S.  Basil,    de    vera    et    pia    Fide,  that  St.  Augustine  speaks  de  illis  dog- 

Manifesta   defectio   fidei   est  importare  matibus  quae  necessaria  sunt  omnibus 

quicquam  eorum  quae  scripta  non  sunt.  simpliciter,    of   those    points    of   faith 

S.  Hilar.  lib.  ii.  ad  Const.  Aug.     Fidem  which  are  necessary  simply  for  all  men. 

tantum  secundum  ea  quae  scripta  sunt  So   far  then   he   grants   the   question, 

desiderantem,  et  hoc  qui  repudiat,  An-  And  that  you  may  know  it   fell  not 

tichristus  est,  et  qui  simulat,  anathema  from  him  on  the  sudden,  he  had  said 

est.     S.  Aug.  lib.   ii.  de  Doctr.  Chris-  as  much  before  in  the  beginning  of  the 

tian.  c.  9.     In  iis  quae  aperte  in  scrip-  same  chapter ;   and   here   he   confirms 

tura  posita  sunt,  inveniuntur  ilia  omnia  it  again. 

quae  continent  fidem,  moresque  vivendi.         h  Scotus,  Proleg.  in  Sent.  q.  2.   Scrip- 

And  to  this  place  Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de  tura  sufficienter  continet  doctrinam  ne- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  43 

have  not  we  reason  then  to  account  it,  as  it  is,  the  foundation  Sect.  15. 
of  our  faith  ?  And  » Stapleton  himself,  though  an  angry 
opposite,  confesses,  "  That  the  scripture  is,  in  some  sort,  the 
foundation  of  faith  ;  that  is,  in  the  nature  of  testimony,  and 
in  the  matter  or  thing  to  be  believed."  And  if  the  scripture 
be  the  foundation  to  which  we  are  to  go  for  witness,  if  there 
be  doubt  about  the  faith,  and  in  which  we  are  to  find  the 
thing  that  is  to  be  believed  as  necessary  in  the  faith ;  we 
never  did  nor  never  will  refuse  any  tradition  that  is  universal 
and  apostolic,  for  the  better  exposition  of  the  scripture  ;  nor 
any  definition  of  the  church,  in  which  she  goes  to  the  scrip- 
ture for  what  she  teaches ;  and  thrusts  nothing,  as  funda- 
mental in  the  faith,  upon  the  world,  but  what  the  scripture 
fundamentally  makes  materiam  credendorum,  the  substance 
of  that  which  is  so  to  be  believed  ;  whether  immediately  and 
expressly  in  words,  or  more  remotely,  where  a  clear  and  full 
deduction  draws  it  out. 

II. — Against  the  beginning  of  this  paragraph  A.  C.  ex-  A.  C.  p.  48. 
cepts.  And  first,  he  says,  "  It  is  true  that  the  church  of 
England  grounded  her  positive  articles  upon  scripture :  that 
is,  it  is  true,  if  themselves  may  be  competent  judges  in  their 
own  cause.11  But  this,  by  the  leave  of  A.  C.,  is  true,  without 
making  ourselves  judges  in  our  own  cause.  For  "  that  all 
the  positive  articles  of  the  present  church  of  England  are 
grounded  upon  scripture,11  we  are  content  to  be  judged  by 
the  joint  and  constant  belief  of  the  Fathers,  which  lived  within 
the  first  four  or  five  hundred  years  after  Christ,  when  the 
church  was  at  the  best ;  and  by  the  councils  held  within 
those  times  ;  and  to  submit  to  them  in  all  those  points  of 
doctrine.  Therefore  we  desire  not  to  be  judges  in  our  own 
cause.  And  if  any  whom  A.  C.  calls  a  novelist  can  truly 
say  and  maintain  this,  he  will  quickly  prove  himself  no 
novelist.  And  for  the  negative  articles ;  they  refute,  where 
the  thing  affirmed  by  you  is  either  not  affirmed  in  scripture, 
or  not  directly  to  be  concluded  out  of  it.  Upon  this  negative 

cessariam  viatori.     Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  i.         *  Scripturam   fundamentum   esse  et 

A.   10.  ad  i.     In  doctrina   Christ!  et  columnam  fidei  fatemur  in  suo  genere, 

apostolorum,    veritas     fidei    est    suffi-  i.   e.    in   genere   testimoniorum,  et  in 

cienter  explicata.     And  he  speaks  there  materia  eredeiidarum.     Relect.  Cont.  4. 

of  the  written  word.  q.  i.  Ar.  3.  in  fine. 

44  ArclMshop  Laud  against 

Sect.  15.  ground  A.  C.  infers  again,  "  That  the  baptism  of  infants  is 
'  ' p* 4'  not  expressly  (at  least,  not  evidently)  affirmed  in  scripture, 
nor  directly  (at  least,  not  demonstratively)  concluded  out  of 
it."  In  which  case,  he  professes,  "  he  would  gladly  know 
what  can  be  answered,  to  defend  this  doctrine  to  be  a  point 
of  faith  necessary  for  the  salvation  of  infants.11  And  in  con- 
clusion professes,  "  he  cannot  easily  guess  what  answer  can 
be  made,  unless  we  will  acknowledge  authority  of  church 
tradition  necessary  in  this  case." 

III. — And  truly,  since  A.  C.  is  so  desirous  of  an  answer,  I 
will  give  it  freely.  And  first,  in  the  general.  I  am  no  way 
satisfied  with  A.  C.  his  addition,  "  not  expressly ;  at  least,  not 
evidently."  What  means  he  ?  If  he  speak  of  the  letter  of 
the  scripture,  then,  whatsoever  is  expressly  is  evidently  in 
the  scripture ;  and  so  his  addition  is  vain.  If  he  speak  of 
the  meaning  of  the  scripture,  then  his  addition  is  cunning ; 
for  many  things  are  expressly  in  scripture,  which  yet,  in  their 
meaning,  are  not  evidently  there.  And,  whatever  he  mean, 
my  words  are,  "  That  our  negative  articles  refute  that  which 
is  not  affirmed  in  scripture,"  without  any  addition  of  expressly, 
or  evidently.  And  he  should  have  taken  my  words  as  I  used 
them.  I  like  nor  change  nor  addition ;  nor  am  I  bound  to 
either  of  A.  C.'s  making.  And  I  am  as  little  satisfied  with 
his  next  addition  "  nor  directly,  at  least,  not  demonstratively, 
concluded  out  of  it."  For  are  there  not  many  things  in 
good  logic  concluded  directly,  which  yet  are  not  concluded 
demonstratively?  Surely  there  are.  For  to  be  directly  or 
indirectly  concluded,  flows  from  the  mood  or  form  of  the 
syllogism;  to  be  demonstratively  concluded,  flows  from  the 
matter  or  nature  of  the  propositions.  If  the  propositions 
be  prime  and  necessary  truths,  the  syllogism  is  demonstrative 
and  scientifical,  because  the  propositions  are  such.  If  the 
propositions  be  probable  only,  though  the  syllogism  be  made 
in  the  clearest  mood,  yet  is  the  conclusion  no  more.  The 
inference  or  consequence,  indeed,  is  clear  and  necessary ;  but 
the  consequent  is  but  probable  or  topical,  as  the  propositions 
were.  Now  my  words  were  only  for  a  direct  conclusion,  and 
no  more :  though,  in  this  case,  I  might  give  A.  C.  his  caution  : 
for  scripture  here  is  the  thing  spoken  of.  And  scripture 
being  a  principle,  and  every  text  of  scripture  confessedly  a 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


principle  among  all  Christians,  whereof  no  man  k  desires  any  Sect.  15. 
further  proof;  I  would  fain  know  why  that  which  is  plainly 
and  apparently,  that  is,  by  direct  consequence,  proved  out  of 
scripture,  is  not  demonstratively  or  scientifically  proved  ?  If, 
at  least,  he  think  there  can  be  any  demonstration  in  divinity : 
and  if  there  can  be  none,  why  did  he  add  "  demonstratively  T 
IV. — Next,  in  particular ;  I  answer  to  the  instance  which 
A.  C.  makes  concerning  the  baptism  of  infants,  That  it  mayA.C.  p.  49. 
be  concluded  directly  (and  let  A.  C.  judge,  whether  not  de- 
monstratively) out  of  scripture,  both  that  infants  ought  to 
be  baptized,  and  that  baptism  is  necessary  to  their  salvation. 
And  first,  that  baptism  is  necessary  to  the  salvation  of  in- 
fants (in  the  ordinary  way  of  the  church,  without  binding 
God  to  the  use  and  means  of  that  sacrament  to  which  he 
hath  bound  us)  l  is  express  in  St.  John  iii.  5  :  Except  a  man 
be  born  again  of  water  and  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God.  So,  no  baptism,  no  entrance.  Nor  can 
infants  creep  in  any  other  ordinary  way.  And  this  is  the 
received  opinion  of  all  the  ancient  church  of  m  Christ.  And 

k  Habitus  enim  fidei  ita  se  habet  in 
ordine  ad  theologiam,  sicut  se  habet 
habitus  intellectus  ad  scientias  huma- 
nas.  M.  Canus.,  lib.  ii.  de  Loc.  c.  8. 

1  St.  August,  expressly  of  the  baptism 
of  infants.  Lib.  i.  de  Peceato,  Mer.  et 
Remiss,  c.  30.  et  lib.  ii.  c.  27:  et  lib. 
iii.  de  Anima  et  ejus  Or.'gine,  c.  13. 
Nay,  they  of  the  Roman  party  which 
urge  the  baptism  of  infants  as  a  matter 
of  faith,  and  yet  not  to  be  concluded 
out  of  scripture,  when  they  are  not  in 
eager  pursuit  of  this  controversy,  but 
look  upon  truth  with  a  more  indifferent 
eye,  confess  as  much  (even  the  learnedest 
of  them)  as  we  ask.  Advertendum 
autem  Salvatorem  dum  dicit,  Nisi  quis 
renatus,  &c.  necessitatem  imponere  om- 
nibus, ac  proinde  parvulos  debere  re- 
nasci  ex  aqua  et  Spiritu.  Jansen.  Harm, 
in  Evang.  c.  20.  So  here  is  baptism 
necessary  for  infants,  and  that  necessity 
imposed  by  our  Saviour,  and  not  by  the 
church  only.  Haeretici  nullo  alio  quam 
hoc  scriptures  testimonio  probare  pos- 
sunt,  infantes  esse  baptizandos.  Maid, 
in  S.  Job.  iii.  5.  So  Maldonat  con- 
fesses, that  the  heretics  (we  know  whom 
he  means)  can  prove  the  baptism  of 
infants  by  no  testimony  of  scripture 
but  this:  which  speech  implies,  that 
by  this  testimony  of  scripture  it  is  and 

can  be  proved ;  and  therefore  not  by 
church  tradition  only.  And  I  would 
fain  know  why  Bellarmine,  lib.  i.  de 
Baptism,  cap.  8.  §.  5,  should  bring 
three  arguments  out  of  scripture  to 
prove  the  baptism  of  infants,  "  Habemus 
in  scripturis  tria  argumenta,  &c.,"  if 
baptism  cannot  be  proved  at  all  out  of 
scripture,  but  only  by  the  tradition  of 
the  church.  And  yet  this  is  not  Bel- 
larmine's  way  alone,  but  Suarez's,  in 
Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  68.  Disput.  25.  sect, 
i.  §.  2.  Ex  scriptura  possunt  varia 
argumenta  sumi  ad  confirmandum  p»- 
dobaptismum.  Et  similiter,  &c.  And 
Greg,  de  Valentia,  L.  de  Baptism.  Par- 
vulorum,  c.  2.  §.  i.  And  the  pope 
himself,  Innocent.  III.  lib.  3.  Decretal. 
Tit.  42.  cap.  Majores.  And  they  all 
jump  with  St.  Ambr.  lib.  x.  Epist.  84. 
ad  Demetriadem  Virginem,  who  ex- 
pressly affirms  it,  Paedobaptismum  esse 
constitutionem  Salvatoris;  and  proves 
it  out  of  John  iii.  5. 

m  Infantes  reos  esse  originalis  pec- 
cati,  et  ideo  baptizandos  esse,  antiquam 
fidei  regulam  vocat.  S.  Aug.  Serm.  8. 
de  Verb.  Apost.  c.  8.  Et  nemo  vobis 
susurret  doctrinas  alienas,  hoc  ecclesia 
semper  habuit,  semper  tenuit,  hoc  a 
majorum  fide  recepit,  &c.  S.  Aug. 
Serm.  10.  de  Verb.  Apost.  c.  2.  et 

46  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  15.  secondly,  That  infants  ought  to  be  baptized,  is,  first,  plain 
by  evident  and  direct  consequence  out  of  scripture.  For  if 
there  be  no  salvation  for  infants  in  the  ordinary  way  of  the 
church  but  by  baptism,  and  this  appear  in  scripture,  as  it 
doth,  then,  out  of  all  doubt,  the  consequence  is  most  evident 
out  of  that  scripture,  that  infants  are  to  be  baptized,  that 
their  salvation  may  be  certain.  For  they  which  cannot 
n  help  themselves  must  not  be  left  only  to  extraordinary 
helps,  of  which  we  have  no  assurance,  and  for  which  we  have 
no  warrant  at  all  in  scripture,  while  we,  in  the  mean  time, 
neglect  the  ordinary  way  and  means  commanded  by  Christ. 
Secondly,  it  is  very  near  an  expression  in  scripture  itself. 
For  when  °  St.  Peter  had  ended  that  great  sermon  of  his, 
Acts  ii.,  he  applies  two  comforts  unto  them,  verse  38 :  Amend 
your  lives,  and  be  baptized,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  And  then,  verse  39,  he  infers,  For  the  promise  is 
made  to  you  and  to  your  children.  The  promise ;  what  pro- 
mise ?  What  !  Why  the  promise  of  sanctification  by  the 
Holy  Ghost.  By  what  means  ?  Why,  by  baptism.  For  it  is 
expressly,  Be  baptized,  and  ye  shall  receive.  And  as  expressly, 
This  promise  is  made  to  you  and  to  your  children.  And  there- 
fore A.  C.  may  find  it,  if  he  will,  "  That  the  baptism  of  infants 
may  be  directly  concluded  out  of  scripture."  For  some  of 
his  own  party,  P  Ferus  and  <i  Salmeron,  could  both  find  it 
there.  And  so  (if  it  will  do  him  any  pleasure)  he  hath  my 
answer,  which,  he  saith,  he  would  be  glad  to  know. 

V. — It  is  true,  r  Bellarmine  presses  a  main  place  out  of  St. 
Augustine,  and  he  urges  it  hard.  St.  Augustine^s s  words 
are,  "  The  custom  of  our  mother  the  church  in  baptizing 
infants  is  by  no  means  to  be  contemned  or  thought  super- 
fluous, nor  yet  at  all  to  be  believed,  unless  it  were  an  apo- 
stolical tradition."  The  place  is  truly  cited,  but  seems  a  great 

S.  Ambros.  lib.    x.  Ep.  84.  circa  me-  consentire,  quum  ad  usum  rationis  per- 

dium.     Et  S.  Chrysost.  Horn,  de  Adam  veniunt,  ad  implenda  promissa  in  bap- 

et  Eva.    Hoc  px-aedicat  ecclesia  catholica  tismo,  &c.     Salm.  Tract.  14,  upon  the 

ubique  diffusa.  place. 

n  Egi  causam  eorum  qui  pro  se  loqui  r  Bellarm.  de  verbo  Dei,  lib.  iv.  c.  9. 

non   possunt,   &c.     S.  Aug.   Serm.   8.  §.5. 

de  Verb.  Apost.  c.  8.  s  Consuetudo  matris  ecclesiae  in  bap- 

o  Acts  ii.  38,  39.  tizandis  parvulis  nequaquam  spernenda 

P  Nullum  excipit,  non  Judamm,  non  est,    nee   omnino   credenda,    nisi    apo- 

Gentilem,  non  adultum,  non  puerum,  stolica  esset  traditio.     S.  August.  Gen. 

&c.     Ferus  in  Act.  ii.  39.  ad  Lit.  c.  23. 

q  Et  ad  filios  vestros :  quare  debent 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  47 

deal  stronger  than  indeed  it  is.  For  first,  it  is  not  denied  Sect.  15. 
that  this  is  an  apostolical  tradition,  and  therefore  to  be 
believed.  But,  secondly,  not  therefore  only.  Nor  doth  St. 
Augustine  say  so,  nor  doth  Bellarmine  press  it  that  way. 
The  truth  is,  it  would  have  been  somewhat  difficult  to  find 
the  collection  out  of  scripture  only  for  the  baptism  of  infants, 
since  they  do  not  actually  believe.  And  therefore  St.  Augus- 
tine is  at  nee  credenda  nisi,  that  this  custom  of  the  church 
had  not  been  to  be  believed,  had  it  not  been  an  apostolical 
tradition.  But  the  tradition  being  apostolical  led  on  the 
church  easily  to  see  the  necessary  deduction  out  of  scripture. 
And  this  is  not  the  least  use  of  tradition,  to  lead  the  church 
into  the  true  meaning  of  those  things  which  are  found  in 
scripture,  though  not  obvious  to  every  eye  there.  And  that 
this  is  St.  Augustine^s  meaning  is  manifest  by  himself,  who 
best  knew  it.  For  when  he  had  said,  l  as  he  doth,  that  to 
baptize  children  is  antiqua  fidei  regula,  the  ancient  rule  of 
faith,  and  the  constant  tenet  of  the  church,  yet  he  doubts  not 
to  collect  and  deduce  it  out  of  scripture  also.  For  when 
Pelagius  urged  that  infants  needed  not  to  be  baptized 
because  they  had  no  original  sin,  St.  Augustine  relies  not 
upon  the  tenet  of  the  church  only,  but  argues  from  the  text 
thus  :  u  "  What  need  have  infants  of  Christ,  if  they  be  not  sick?" 
for  the  sound  need  not  the  physician,  St.  Matth.  ix.  And 
again,  is  not  this  said  by  Pelagius,  ut  non  accedant  ad  Jesum, 
that  infants  may  not  come  to  their  Saviour?  Bed  clamat 
Jesus,  but  Jesus  cries  out,  Suffer  little  ones  to  come  unto  me*, 
St.  Mark  x.  And  all  this  is  fully  acknowledged  by  y  Calvin* 
namely,  "  That  all  men  acknowledge  the  baptism  of  infants 
to  descend  from  apostolical  tradition  :"  z  and  yet  that  "  it 
doth  not  depend  upon  the  bare  and  naked  authority  of  the 
church."  Which  he  speaks  not  in  regard  of  tradition,  but 

*  Cur  antiquam  fidei  regulam   fran-         x  Mark  x.  14. 

gere  conaris?     S.  August.  Senn.  8.  de         y  Nullus   est  scriptor  tarn  vetustus. 

Verb.  Apost.  c.  8.    Hoc  ecclesia  semper  qui  non  ejus  originem  ad  apostoloruin 

tenuit.     Ibid.  Serm.  10.  c.  2.  seculum  pro  certo  referat.  Calv.  4.  Inst. 

u  Quid   necessarium    habuit    infans  c.  16.  §.  8. 

Christum,  si  non   aegrotat  ?     S.  Matt.         z  Miserrimum  asylum  foret,   si   pro 

ix.   12.     Quid  est  quod  dicis,  nisi  ut  defensione     paedobaptismi     ad     nudam 

non    accedant    ad   Jesum  ?     Sed    tibi  ecclesiae    authoritatem    fugere    cogere- 

clamat  Jesus,  Sine  parvulos  venire  ad  mur.    Calv.  4.  Inst.  c.  8.  §.  16. 
me.    S.  August,  in  the  forecited  places. 

48  ArMishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  15, 1 6.  in  relation  to  such  proof  as  is  to  be  made  by  necessary  con- 
sequence out  of  scripture  over  and  above  tradition. 

VI. — As  for  tradition,  a  I  have  said  enough  for  that,  and 
as  much  as  A.  C.  where  it  is  truly  apostolical.  And  yet  if 
any  thing  will  please  him,  I  will  add  this  concerning  this 
particular,  the  baptizing  of  infants  ;  that  the  church  received 
this  by  b  tradition  from  the  apostles.  By  tradition.  And 
what  then  ?  May  it  not  directly  be  concluded  out  of  scrip- 
ture, because  it  was  delivered  to  the  church  by  way  of  tradi- 
tion ?  I  hope  A.  C.  will  never  say  so.  For  certainly  in 
doctrinal  things,  nothing  so  likely  to  be  a  tradition  apo- 
stolical as  that  which  hath  a  c  root  and  a  foundation  in  scrip- 
ture. For  apostles  cannot  write  or  deliver  contrary,  but 
subordinate  and  subservient  things. 

Jp»  I  asked  how  he  knew  scripture  to  be  scripture,  and 
in  particular,  Genesis,  Exodus,  &c.  These  are  believed 
to  be  scripture,  yet  not  proved  out  of  any  place  of  scrip- 
ture. The  bishop  said,  That  the  books  of  scripture 
are  principles  to  be  supposed,  and  needed  not  to  be 

Sect.  1 6.  ^'  I- — I  did  never  love  too  curious  a  search  into  that 
which  might  put  a  man  into  a  wheel,  and  circle  him  so  long 
between  proving  scripture  by  tradition  and  tradition  by 
scripture,  till  the  devil  find  a  means  to  dispute  him  into 
infidelity,  and  make  him  believe  neither.  I  hope  this  is  no 
part  of  your  meaning.  Yet  I  doubt  this  d  question,  "  How 
do  you  know  scripture  to  be  scripture  T  hath  done  more 
harm  than  you  will  be  ever  able  to  help  by  tradition.  But 
I  must  follow  that  way  which  you  draw  me.  And  because 

a  §.  15.  Num.  i.  A.  C.  p.  49,  c  Yea,  and  Bellarmine  himself  avers, 

b  Orig.  in  Rom.  vi.  6.  torn.  ii.  p.  543.  Omnes    traditiones,    &c.    contineri    in 

Pro    hoc    ecclesia    ab    apostolis    tradi-  scripturis  in  universali..     De  Verb.  Dei 

tionem  suscepit,  etiam  parvulis  baptis-  non    scripto,    lib.    iv.    c.    to.    §.    Sic 

mum  dare.     Et  S.  August.  Serm.    10.  etiam.     And  St.  Basil,  Serm.  de  Fide 

de  Verb.  Apost.  c.   2.     Hoc  ecclesia  a  approves  only  those  agrapha,  quae  non 

majorum   fide  percepit.     And    it  is  to  sunt  alieria  a  pia  secundum  scripturam 

be  observed,  that  neither  of  these  Fa-  sententia. 

thers  (nor  I  believe  any  other)  say  that         d  Qui  conantur  fidem  destruere  sub 

the  church  received  it  a  traditione  sola,  specie  quaestionis  difficilis,  aut  forte  in- 

or  a  majorum  fide  sola ;  as  if  tradition  dissolubilis,  &c.  Orig.  Quest.  35.  in  S. 

did  exclude  collection  of  it  out  of  scrip-  Matth. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  49 

it  is  so  much  insisted  upon  by  you,  and  is  in  itself  a  e  matter   Sect.  16. 
of  such  consequence,  I  will  sift  it  a  little  further. 

II. — Many  men  labouring  to  settle  this  great  principle  in 
divinity,  have  used  divers  means  to  prove  it.  All  have  not 
gone  the  same  way,  nor  all  the  right  way.  You  cannot  be 
right,  that  resolve  faith  of  the  scriptures,  being  the  word  of 
God,  into  only  tradition.  For  only,  and  no  other  proof,  are 
equal.  To  prove  the  scripture  therefore  (so  called  by  way 
of  excellence)  to  be  the  word  of  God,  there  are  several  offers 
at  divers  proofs.  For  first,  some  fly  to  the  testimony  and 
witness  of  the  church  and  her  tradition,  which  constantly 
believes  and  unanimously  delivers  it.  Secondly,  some  to  the 
light  and  the  testimony  which  the  scripture  gives  to  itself ; 
with  other  internal  proofs  which  are  observed  in  it,  and  to 
be  found  in  no  other  writing  whatsoever.  Thirdly,  some  to 
the  testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  clears  up  the  light 
that  is  in  scripture,  and  seals  this  faith  to  the  souls  of  men, 
that  it  is  God's  word.  Fourthly,  all  that  have  not  im- 
brutished  themselves,  and  sunk  below  their  species  and  order 
of  nature,  give  even  natural  reason  leave  to  come  in  and 
make  some  proof,  and  give  some  approbation  upon  the  weigh- 
ing and  the  consideration  of  other  arguments.  And  this 
must  be  admitted,  if  it  be  but  for  pagans  and  infidels,  who 
either  consider  not  or  value  not  any  one  of  the  other  three  : 
yet  must  some  way  or  other  be  converted,  or  left  without 
excuse*,  Rom.  i.  20,  and  that  is  done  by  this  very  evidence. 

III. — For  the  first,  the  tradition  of  the  church,  which 
is  your  way :  that  taken  and  considered  alone  is  so  far  from 
being  the  only,  that  it  cannot  be  a  sufficient  proof  to  believe 
by  divine  faith  that  scripture  is  the  word  of  God.  For  that 
which  is  a  full  and  sufficient  proof  is  able  of  itself  to  settle 
the  soul  of  man  concerning  it.  Now  the  tradition  of  the 
church  is  not  able  to  do  this.  For  it  may  be  further  asked, 
why  we  should  believe  the  church's  tradition  ?  And  if  it 
be  answered,  We  may  believe,  because  the  church  is  in- 

e  To  know  that  scriptures  are  divine  vere  divinos.    Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de  Verb, 

and  infallible  in  every  part,  is  a  foun-  Dei  non  scripto,  c.  4.  §.  Quarto  necesse. 

dation  so  necessary,  as  if  it  be  doubt-  — Et  etiam  libros  qui  sunt  in  manibus 

fully  questioned,  all  the  faith  built  upon  esse  illos.     Ibid.  §.  Sexto  oportet. 
scripture  falls  to  the  ground.  A.  C.  p.  47.         {  Rom.  i.  20. 
Necesse  est  nosse  extare  libros  aliquos 

50  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  fallibly  governed  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  it  may  yet  be  de- 
manded of  you,  how  that  may  appear?  And  if  this  be 
demanded,  either  you  must  say  you  have  it  by  special  reve- 
lation, which  is  the  private  spirit  you  object  to  other  men ; 
or  else  you  must  attempt  to  prove  it  by  scriptures,  as  all  of 
you  do.  And  that  very  offer,  to  prove  it  out  of  scripture, 
is  a  sufficient  acknowledgment  that  the  scripture  is  a  higher 
proof  than  the  church's  tradition,  which  (in  your  grounds) 
is,  or  may  be,  questionable  till  you  come  thither.  Besides, 
this  is  an  inviolable  ground  of  reason,  "  h  That  the  principles 
of  any  conclusion  must  be  of  more  credit  than  the  conclusion 
itself."  Therefore,  if  the  articles  of  faith,  the  Trinity,  the 
resurrection,  and  the  rest,  be  the  conclusions,  and  the  prin- 
ciples by  which  they  are  proved  be  only  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion, it  must  needs  follow,  that  the  tradition  of  the  church 
is  more  infallible  than  the  articles  of  the  faith ;  if  the  faith 
which  we  have  of  the  articles  should  be  finally  resolved  into 
the  veracity  of  the  church's  testimony.  But  this  'your 
learned  and  wary  men  deny;  and  therefore  I  hope  yourself 
dare  not  affirm. 

IV. — Again ;  if  the  voice  of  the  church  (saying  "  the  books 
of  scripture  commonly  received  are  the  word  of  God"")  be 
the  formal  object  of  faith,  upon  which  alone  absolutely  I  may 
resolve  myself ;  then  every  man  not  only  may,  but  ought 
to  resolve  his  faith  into  the  voice  or  tradition  of  the  church  : 
for  every  man  is  bound  to  rest  upon  the  proper  and  formal 
object  of  the  faith.  But  nothing  can  be  more  evident  than 
this,  "  That  a  man  ought  not  to  resolve  his  faith  of  this 
principle  into  the  sole  testimony  of  the  church."  Therefore 
neither  is  that  testimony,  or  tradition  alone,  the  formal 
object  of  faith.  kThe  learned  of  your  own  part  grant  this: 

£  Esse  aliquas  veras  traditiones  de-  possum,  qui  asserunt  fidem  nostram 

monstratur  ex  scripturis.  Bellarm.  lib.  eo  tanquam  in  ultimam  credendi  causam 

iv.  de  Verbo  Dei  non  seripto,  c.  5.  and  reducendam  esse.  Ut  credamus  eccle- 

A.  C.  p.  50.  proves  tradition  out  of  siam  esse  veracein,  &c.  M.  Canus,  lib. 

2  Thes.  ii.  15.  ii.  de  Locis,  c.  8.  §.  Cui,  et  tertium. 

h  Arist.  I.  Post.  c.  2.  T.  xvi.  per  k  Vox  ecclesiae  non  est  forraale  ob- 

Pacium.  Quocirca  si  Sia  ra  -rrpcara,  jectum  fidei.  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  4. 

propter  prima  scimus  et  credimus,  ilia  q.  3.  A.  2 — Licet  in  articulo  fidei 

quoque  scimus  et  credimus  /j.a\\ov,  Credo  ecclesiam  forte  continuatur  hoc 

magis,  quia  per  ilia  scimus  et  credimus  totum,  Credo  ea  qtise  docet  ecclesia : 

etiam  posteriora.  tamen  non  intelligitur  riecessario,  quod 

i  Eorum    errorem    dissimulare    non  Credo   docenti   ecclesiaj    tanquam  testi 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  51 

"  Although  in  that  article  of  the  Creed, '  I  believe  the  catholic  Sect.  16. 
church,'  peradventure  all  this  be  contained,  I  believe  those 
things  which  the  church  teacheth ;  yet  this  is  not  necessarily 
understood,  that  I  believe  the  church  teaching  as  an  infallible 
witness."  And  if  they  did  not  confess  this,  it  were  no  hard 
thing  to  prove. 

V. — But  here  is  the  cunning  of  this  device.  All  the 
authorities  of  Fathers,  councils,  nay,  of  scripture  too, ]  (though 
this  be  contrary  to  their  own  doctrine,)  must  be  finally 
resolved  into  the  authority  of  the  present  Roman  church. 
And  though  they  would  seem  to  have  us  believe  the  Fathers 
and  the  church  of  old,  yet  they  will  not  have  us  take  their 
doctrine  from  their  own  writings,  or  the  decrees  of  councils  ; 
because  (as  they  say)  we  cannot  know  by  reading  them 
what  their  meaning  was,  but  from  the  infallible  testimony 
of  the  present  Roman  church  teaching  by  tradition.  Now 
by  this  two  things  are  evident.  First,  that  they  ascribe 
as  great  authority  (if  not  greater)  to  a  part  of  the  catholic 
church  as  they  do  to  the  whole,  which  we  believe  in  our 
Creed,  and  which  is  the  society  of  all  Christians.  And 
this  is  full  of  absurdity  in  nature,  in  reason,  in  all  things, 
that  any  mpart  should  be  of  equal  worth,  power,  credit,  or 
authority  with  the  whole.  Secondly,  that  in  their  doctrine 
concerning  the  infallibility  of  their  church,  their  proceeding 
is  most  unreasonable.  For  if  you  ask  them  why  they 
believe  their  whole  doctrine  to  be  the  sole  true  catholic 
faith  2  their  answer  is,  "  Because  it  is  agreeable  to  the 
word  of  God,  and  the  doctrine  and  tradition  of  the  ancient 
church."  If  you  ask  them  how  they  know  that  to  be  so  2 

infallibili.  Ibid. — Ubi  etiam  rejicit  opi-  et  legibus  ejus,  vilior  est  Christi  legi- 
nionem  Durandi  et  Gabr.  et  Waldens.  bus  et  scripturis  sanctis  necessario  post- 
lib,  ii.  Doctr.  Fidei  Art.  2.  c.  21.  num.  ponenda.  Wald.  lib.  ii.  Doct.  Fidei  Art. 
4.  Testimonium  ecclesiae  catholicae  2.  cap.  21.  num.  i. 
est  objectum  fidei  Christians,  et  le-  m  Totum  est  majus  sua  parte.  Etiamsi 
gislatio  scripturae  canonicae,  subjicitur  axioma  sit  apud  Euclydem,  non  tamen 
tamen  ipsi,  sicut  testis  judici,  et  tes-  ideo  geometricum  putandum  est,  quia 
timonium  veritati.  &c. — Canus,  Loc.  geometres  eo  utitur.  Utitur  enim  et 
lib.  ii.  cap.  8.  Nee  si  ecclesia  aditum  tota  logica.  Ram.  in  Schol.  Matth.  And 
nobis  praebet  ad  hujusmodi  libros  sa-  Aristotle  vindicates  such  propositions 
cros  cognoscendos,  protinus  ibi  acquies-  rb  Iv  rois  /xafl^yucwn  KaXov^va.  a£ua- 
cendum  est,  sed  ultra  oportet  progredi,  p.ara  from  being  usurped  by  particular 
et  solida  Dei  veritate  niti,  &c.  sciences  :  airaai  yap  vir<ipxel>  &c->  flu'a 
1  Omnis  ergo  ecclesiastica  author!-  conveniunt  omni  enti,  et  non  alicui 
tas,  cum  sit  ad  testificandum  de  Christo  generi  separatim.  Metaph.  lib.  iv.  c.  3. 

torn.  vii. 

E  2 

52  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  they  will  then  produce  testimonies  of  scripture,  councils, 
and  Fathers.  But  if  you  ask  a  third  time,  by  what  means 
they  are  assured  that  these  testimonies  do  indeed  make  for 
them  and  their  cause  ?  they  will  not  then  have  recourse 
to  text  of  scripture,  or  exposition  of  Fathers,  or  phrase  and 
propriety  of  language,  in  which  either  of  them  were  first 
written,  or  to  the  scope  of  the  author,  or  the  n  causes  of  the 
thing  uttered,  or  the  conference  with  like  °  places,  or  the 
antecedents  Pand  consequents  of  the  same  places,  qor  the 
exposition  of  the  dark  and  doubtful  places  of  scripture  by 
the  undoubted  and  manifest ;  with  divers  other  rules  given 
for  the  true  knowledge  and  understanding  of  scripture,  which 
do  frequently  occur  in  rSt.  Augustine.  No,  none  of  these 
or  the  like  helps :  that,  with  them,  were  to  admit  a  private 
spirit,  ,or  to  make  way  for  it.  But  their  final  answer  is, 
"  They  know  it  to  be  so,  because  the  present  Roman  church 
witnesseth  it  according  to  tradition."  So  arguing  a  primo 
ad  ultimum,  from  first  to  last ;  the  present  church  of  Rome 
and  her  followers  believe  her  own  doctrine  and  tradition  to 
•*.  be  true  and  catholic  because  she  professes  it  to  be  such. 
And  if  this  be  not  to  prove  idem  per  idem,  the  same  by  the 
same,  I  know  not  what  is :  which,  though  it  be  most  absurd 
in  all  kind  of  learning,  yet  out  of  this  I  see  not  how  it  is 
possible  to  wind  themselves,  so  long  as  the  last  resolution 
of  their  faith  must  rest  (as  they  teach)  upon  the  tradition 
of  the  present  church  only. 

VI. — It  seems  therefore  to  me  very  necessary,  sthat  we  be 

n  Intelligent^  dictorum  ex  causis  est  festiora  quaeque  praevaleant,  et  cle  incer- 

assumenda  dicendi,  quia  non   sermoni  tis   certiora   prascribant.    Tert.    L.    de 

res,   sed    rei    sermo    est    subjectus.    S.  Resur.  c.  1 9.  et  1 1 .     S.  August,  lib.  iii. 

Hilar.  lib.    iv.    de  Trin. — Ex  materia  de    Doct.    Christ,    c.     26. — Moris    est 

dicti  dirigendus  est  sensus.     Tert.  1.  de  scripturarum    obscuris    manifesta    sub- 

Resur.  Carnis,  c.  37.  nectere,  et  quod  prius  sub  aenigmatibus 

o  Videndo    differentias    similium   ad  dixerint,  apertavoce  proferre.  S.  Hieron. 

similia.     Orig.  Tract.  19.  in  S.  Matt.  in  Esa.  19.  princ.  vid.  §.  26.  num.  4. 

P  Recolendum  est  unde  venerit  ista  r  S.  August,  lib.  iii.  de  Doctr.  Chris- 

sententia,  et  quse   illam   superiora  pe-  tiana. 

pererint,  quibusque  connexa  dependeat.  s  And  this  is  so  necessary,  that  Bel- 
is.  August.  Ep.  29. — Solet  circumstantia  larmine  confesses,  that  if  tradition  (which 
scripturae  illuminare  sententiam.  S.Aug.  he  relies  upon)  be  not  divine,  he  and 
lib.  Ixxxiii.  Qusest.  q.  69.  his  can  have  no  faith.  Non  habemus 

q  Quae  ambigue  et  obscure  in  non-  fidem.     Fides  enim  verbo  Dei  nititur. 

nullis  scripturae  sacra  locis  dicta  viden-  lib.  iv.  de  Verbo  Dei,  c.   4.  §.    At  si 

tur,   per  ea  quae  alibi    certa   et   indu-  ita  est. 

bitata  habentur   declarantur.    S.  Basil.  And  A.  C.  tells  us,  p.  47;  To  know 

in  Regulis  contractis,  Reg.  267 — Mani-  that  scripture  is  divine  and  infallible 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  53 

able  to  prove  the  books  of  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God  by  Sect.  1 6. 
some  authority  that  is  absolutely  divine.  For  if  they  be 
warranted  unto  us  by  any  authority  less  than  divine,  then 
all  things  contained  in  them  (which  have  no  greater  assur- 
ance than  the  scripture  in  which  they  are  read)  are  not 
objects  of  divine  belief.  And  that  once  granted  will  enforce 
us  to  yield,  that  all  the  articles  of  Christian  belief  have  no 
greater  assurance  than  human  or  moral  faith  or  credulity 
can  afford.  An  authority  then  simply  divine  must  make  good 
the  scripture's  infallibility,  at  least  in  the  last  resolution  of 
our  faith  in  that  point.  This  authority  cannot  be  any 
testimony  or  voice  of  the  *  church  alone.  For  the  church 
consists  of  men  subject  to  error ;  and  no  one  of  them,  4- 
since  the  apostles'  times,  hath  been  assisted  with  so  plen- 
tiful a  measure  of  the  blessed  Spirit  as  to  secure  him 
from  being  deceived ;  and  all  the  parts  being  all  liable  to 
mistaking,  and  fallible,  the  whole  cannot  possibly  be  infal- 
lible in  and  of  itself,  and  privileged  from  being  deceived 
in  some  things  or  other.  And  even  in  those  fundamental 
things  in  which  the  whole  universal  church  neither  doth 
nor  can  err,  yet  even  there  her  authority  is  not  divine, 
because  she  delivers  those  supernatural  truths  by  promise 
of  assistance,  yet  tied  to  means;  and  not  by  any  special 
immediate  revelation,  which  is  necessarily  required  to  the 
very  least  degree  of  divine  authority.  And  therefore  our 
"worthies  do  not  only  say,  but  prove,  "  That  all  the  church's 
constitutions  are  of  the  nature  of  human  law."  xAnd  some 
among  you,  not  unworthy  for  their  learning,  prove  it  at  large, 
That  all  the  church's  testimony,  or  voice,  or  sentence  (call 
it  what  you  will)  is  but  suo  modo,  or  aliquo  modo,  not  simply, 
but  in  a  manner  divine.  Yea,  and  A.  C.  himself  after  all  A.  C.  p.  51. 

in  every  part,  is  a  foundation  so  neces-  tinus  ibi  acquiescendum  est,  sed  ultra 
sary,  as,  if  it  be  doubtfully  questioned,  oportet  progredi,  et  solida  Dei  veritate 
all  the  faith  built  upon  scripture  falls  niti.     Qua  ex  re  intelligitnr  quid  sibi 
to  the  ground.     And  he  gives  the  same  voluerit  Augustinus,  quum  ait,  Evan- 
reason  for  it  p.  50.  which  Bellarmine  gelio  non  crederem,  nisi,  &c.   M.  Canus, 
doth.  lib.  ii.  de  Locis,  c.  8.  fol.  34.  b — Non 
t  Ecclesiam  Spiritu  afflatam  esse,  certe  docet  fundatam  esse  evangelii  fidem  in 
credo.      Non   ut    veritatem    authorita-  ecclesiae  authoritate,  sed,  &c.  Ibid, 
temve  libris   canonicis  tribuat,   sed  ut         u  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  lib.  iii.  §.  9. 
doceat   illos  non   alios   esse   canonicos.         x  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q.  3.  A.  I 
Nee  si  aditum  nobis  praebet  ad  hujus-  et  2. 
modi   sacros    libros   cognoscendos,  pro- 

54  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  his  debate  comes  to  that,  and  no  further,  "  That  the  tradi- 
tion of  the  church  is,  at  least  in  some  sort,  divine  and 
infallible."  Now  that  which  is  divine  but  in  a  sort  or  man- 
ner, be  it  the  church's  manner,  is  aliquo  modo  non  divina,  in 
a  sort  not  divine.  But  this  great  principle  of  faith  (the 
ground  and  proof  of  whatsoever  else  is  of  faith)  cannot  stand 
firm  upon  a  proof  that  is  and  is  not,  in  a  manner  and  not 
in  a  manner,  divine ;  as  it  must,  if  we  have  no  other  anchor 
than  the  external  tradition  of  the  church  to  lodge  it  upon, 
and  hold  it  steady  in  the  midst  of  those  waves  which  daily 
beat  upon  it. 

A.  c.  p.  49.  VII. — Now  here  A.  C.  confesses  expressly,  that  to  prove  the 
books  of  scripture  to  be  divine,  we  must  be  warranted  by 

A.  C.  p.  50.  that  which  is  infallible.  He  confesses  further,  "  that  there 
can  be  no  sufficient  infallible  proof  of  this  but  God's  word, 
written  or  unwritten."  And  he  gives  his  reason  for  it : 

A.  c.  p.  51."  Because,  if  the  proof  be  merely  human  and  fallible,  the 
science  or  faith  which  is  built  upon  it  can  be  no  better." 
So  then  this  is  agreed  on  by  me,  (yet  leaving  other  men  to 
travel  by  their  own  way,  so  be  they  can  come  to  make 
scripture  thereby  infallible,)  that  scripture  must  be  known 
to  be  scripture  by  a  sufficient,  infallible,  divine  proof.  And 
that  such  proof  can  be  nothing  but  the  word  of  God,  is  agreed 
on  also  by  me.  Yea,  and  agreed  on,  for  me,  it  shall  be  like- 
wise, that  God's  word  may  be  written  and  unwritten.  For 
cardinal  yBellarmine  tells  us  truly,  that  it  is  not  the  writing 
or  printing  that  makes  scripture  the  word  of  God ;  but  it  is 
the  prime,  unerring,  essential  truth,  God  himself,  uttering 
and  revealing  it  to  his  church,  that  makes  it  verlmi  Dei,  the 
word  of  God.  And  this  word  of  God  is  uttered  to  men, 
either  immediately  by  God  himself,  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost ;  and  so  it  was  to  the  prophets  and  apostles ;  or 
mediately,  either  by  angels,  to  whom  God  had  spoken  first ; 
and  so  the  law  was  given,  zGal.  iii.,  and  so  also  the  message 
was  delivered  to  the  blessed  Virgin,  a  Luke  i. ;  or  by  the  pro- 

y  Verbum  Dei  non  est  tale,  nee  liabet  Dei,  c.  2.  §.  Ecclesiasticae  traditiones. 
nllam   authoritatem,  quia  scriptum  est         z  Lex  ordinata  per  angelos  in  maim 

in    membranis,    sed   quia   a   Deo   pro-  mediatoris,  Gal.  iii.  19. 
fectnm  est.     Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de  Verb.         a  Luke  i.  30. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  55 

phets  band  apostles ;  and  so  the  scriptures  were  delivered  Sect.  16. 
to  the  church.  But  their  being  written  gave  them  no 
authority  at  all  in  regard  of  themselves.  Written  or  un- 
written, the  word  was  the  same.  But  it  was  written  that 
it  might  be  the  better  c  preserved,  and  continued  with  the 
more  integrity  to  the  use  of  the  church,  and  the  more  faith- 
fully in  our  d  memories.  And  you  have  been  often  enough  told, 
(were  truth,  and  not  the  maintaining  of  a  party,  the  thing 
you  seek  for,)  that  if  you  will  shew  us  any  such  unwritten 
word  of  God  delivered  by  his  prophets  and  apostles,  we  will 
acknowledge  it  to  be  divine  and  infallible.  So,  written  or  un- 
written, that  shall  not  stumble  us.  But  then  A.  C.  must 
not  tell  us,  at  least  not  think  we  shall  swallow  it  into  our 
belief,  that  every  thing  which  he  says  is  the  unwritten  word 
of  God  is  so  indeed. 

VIII. — I  know  Bellarmine  hath  written  a  whole  book 
?De  verbo  Dei  non  scripto,  of  the  word  of  God  not  written, 
in  which  he  handles  the  controversy  concerning  traditions. 
And  the  cunning  is,  to  make  his  weaker  readers  believe,  that 
all  that  which  he  and  his  are  pleased  to  call  traditions,  are 
by  and  by  no  less  to  be  received  and  honoured  than  the 
unwritten  word  of  God  ought  to  be.  Whereas  it  is  a  thing 
of  easy  knowledge,  that  the  unwritten  word  of  God  and 
tradition  are  not  convertible  terms,  that  is,  are  not  all  one. 
For  there  are  many  unwritten  words  of  God  which  were 
never  delivered  over  to  the  church,  for  aught  appears ;  and 
there  are  many  traditions  (affirmed,  at  least,  to  be  such  by 
the  church  of  Rome)  which  were  never  warranted  by  any 
unwritten  word  of  God. 

b  The  Holy  Ghost,  &c.  which  spake  scriptis,  quam  non  credere  verbis. 
by  the  prophets,  in  Symb.  Nicen.  d  Labilis  est  memoria,  et   ideo  in- 

c  Nam  pseudoprophetae,  etiam  viven-  digemus     scriptura :    dicendum     quod 

tibns  adhuc  apostolis,  multas  fingebant  verum  est,  sed  hoc  non  habet,  nisi  ex 

corruptelas  sub  hoc  praetextu  et  titulo,  inundantia  peccatorum.    Henr.  aGand. 

quasi    ab    apostolis    viva    voce    essent  Sum.  p.  J.  Art.  8.  q.  4.  fine. — Christus 

tradita? :  et   propter   hanc    ipsam  can-  ipse  de  pectore  morituro  testamentum 

sam    apostoli    doctriuam    suam    crepe-  transfert    in    tabulas    diu    duraturas. 

runt  literis  comprehendere,  et  ecclesiis  Optatus,  lib.  v.    Christus  ipse  non  trans- 

commeudare.      Chem.    Exam.    Concil.  tulit,  sed  ex  Optati  sententia,  ejus  in- 

Trid.  de  Traditionibus  sub  octavo  ge-  spiratione,  si  non  jussu,  apostoli  trans- 

nere  traditis. — And  so  also  Jans.  Com-  tulerunt. 

ment.    in    Joh.    v.    47.      Sicut    enim         e  Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de  Verbo  Dei  nou 

firmius  est  quod  mandatur  literis,  ita  scripto. 
est  culpabilius   et  majus  non   credere 


56  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  IX. — First,  That  there  are  many  unwritten  words  of  God 
which  were  never  delivered  over  to  the  church,  is  manifest. 
For  when  or  where  were  the  words  which  Christ  spake  to 
his  apostles  during  the  fforty  days  of  his  conversing  with 
them  after  his  resurrection  first  delivered  over  to  the  church  ? 
Or  what  were  the  unwritten  words  he  then  spake  ?  If 
neither  he  nor  his  apostles  or  evangelists  have  delivered 
them  to  the  church,  the  church  ought  not  to  deliver  them 
to  her  children.  Or  if  she  do  s  trader 'e  non  traditum,  make  a 
tradition  of  that  which  was  not  delivered  to  her,  and  by 
some  of  them,  then  she  is  unfaithful  to  God,  and  doth  not 
servare  depositum,  faithfully  keep  that  which  is  committed 
to  her  trust;  hl  Tim.  vi.  And  her  sons  which  come  to 
know  it  are  not  bound  to  obey  her  tradition  against  the 
jword  of  their  Father.  For  wheresoever  Christ  holds  his 
peace,  or  that  his  words  are  not  registered,  I  am  of  kSt. 
^  Augustine's  opinion,  no  man  may  dare,  without  rashness,  say 
they  were  these  or  these.  So  there  were  many  unwritten 
words  of  God  which  were  never  delivered  over  to  the  church, 
and  therefore  never  made  tradition.  And  there  are  many 
traditions  which  cannot  be  said  to  be  the  unwritten  word 
of  God.  For  I  believe  a  learned  Romanist  that  will  weigh 
before  he  speaks  will  not  easily  say,  that  to  anoint,  or  use 
spittle  in  baptism,  or  to  use  three  dippings  in  the  use  of  that 
sacrament,  or  divers  other  like  traditions,  had  their  rise  from 
any  word  of  God  unwritten.  Or  if  he  be  so  hardy  as  to 
say  so,  it  is  gratis  dictum,  and  he  will  have  enough  to  do 
to  prove  it.  So  there  may  be  an  unwritten  word  of  God 
which  is  no  tradition.  And  there  are  many  traditions  which 
are  no  unwritten  word  of  God.  Therefore  tradition  must  be 
taken  two  ways  :  either  as  it  is  the  church's  act  deliver- 
ing, or  the  thing  thereby  delivered;  and  then  it  is  human 

f  Act.  i.  3.  Henr.  a  Gand.  Sum.  p.  i.  A.  10.  q.  i. 

g  Annunciare  aliquid  Christianis  ca-  And  Bellarmine  himself,  that  he  might 

tholicis,  praeter  id  quod  acceperunt,  the  more  safely  defend  himself  in  the 

nunquam  licuit,  nusquam  licet,  nun-  cause  of  traditions,  says,  (but  how 

quam  licebit.  Vincent.  Lirin.  c.  14. — Et  truly,  let  other  men  judge,)  Nullam 

praecipit  nihil  aliud  innovari,  nisi  quod  traditionem  admittimus  contra  scrip- 

traditum  est.  S.  Cyprian,  ad  Pompeium  turam,  lib.  iv.  de  Verbo  Dei,  cap.  3.  §. 

cont.  epist.  Stephan.,  princ.  Deinde  commune. 

h  i  Tim.  vi.  20.  and  2  Tim.  i.  14.  k  S.  August,   torn.    xvi.   in    S.  Joh. 

i  Si  ipsa  (ecclesia)  contraria  scripturae  in  ilia  verba,  Multa  habeo  dicere,  sed 

-diceret,  (fidelis)  ipsi  non  crederet,  &c.  non  potestis  portare  modo. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  57 

authority,  or  from  it,  and  unable  infallibly  to  warrant  divine  Sect.  16. 
faith,  or  to  be  the  object  of  it :  or  else  as  it  is  the  unwritten 
word  of  God ;  and  then,  wherever  it  can  be  made  to  appear 
so,  it  is  of  divine  and  infallible  authority,  no  question.  But 
then  I  would  have  A.  0.  consider  where  he  is  in  this  parti- 
cular: he  tells  us,  "We  must  know  infallibly  that  the  books  A.  C.  p.  49. 
of  holy  scripture  are  divine,11  and  that  "  this  must  be  done  by 
unwritten  tradition,  but  so  as  that  this  tradition  is  the  word 
of  God  unwritten."  Now  let  him  but  prove  that  this  or  any 
tradition  which  the  church  of  Rome  stands  upon  is  the  word 
of  God,  though  unwritten,  and  the  business  is  ended.  But  A.  C.  p.  50. 
A.  C.  must  not  think  that  because  the  tradition  of  the  church 
tells  me  these  books  are  verbwn  Dei,  God's  word,  and  that  I 
do  both  honour  and  believe  this  tradition,  that  therefore  this 
tradition  itself  is  God's  word  too,  and  so  absolutely  sufficient 
and  infallible  to  work  this  belief  in  me.  Therefore,  for  aught 
A.  C.  hath  yet  added,  we  must  on  with  our  inquiry  after  this 
great  business  and  most  necessary  truth. 

X. — 2.  For  the  second  way  of  proving  that  scripture  should 
be  fully  and  sufficiently  known,  as  by  divine  and  infallible 
testimony,  lumine  proprio,  by  the  resplendency  of  that  light 
which  it  hath  in  itself  only,  and  by  the  witness  that  it  can  so 
give  to  itself,  I  could  never  yet  see  cause  to  allow.  ]  For  as 
there  is  no  place  in  scripture  that  tells  us  such  books  con- 
taining such  and  such  particulars  are  the  canon,  and  infallible 
will  and  word  of  God ;  so  if  there  were  any  such  place,  that 
were  no  sufficient  proof:  for  a  man  may  justly  ask  another 
book  to  bear  witness  of  that,  and  again  of  that  another ;  and 
wherever  it  were  written  in  scripture,  that  must  be  a  part  of 
the  whole.  And  no  created  thing  can  alone  give  witness  to 
itself  and  make  it  evident,  nor  one  part  testify  for  another, 
and  satisfy  where  reason  will  but  offer  to  contest ;  except 
those  principles  only  of  natural  knowledge  which  appear  ma- 
nifest by  intuitive  light  of  understanding,  without  any  dis- 
course ;  and  yet  they  also  to  the  weaker  sort  require  induction 
preceding.  Now  this  inbred  light  of  scripture  is  a  thing 
coincident  with  scripture  itself ;  and  so  the  principles  and  the 
conclusion  in  this  kind  of  proof  should  be  entirely  the  same, 

1  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  ii.  §.  4. 

58  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  which  cannot  be.     Besides,  if  this  inward  light  were  so  clear, 
how  could  there  have  been  any  variety  among  the  ancient 

believers  touching  the  authority  of  mSt.  James'  and  St.  Jude^s 

Epistles  and  the  "Apocalypse,  with  other  books  which  were  not 
received  for  divers  years  after  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  ? 
for  certainly  the  light  which  is  in  the  scripture  was  the  same 
then  which  now  it  is.  And  how  could  the  Gospel  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomew, of  St.  Thomas,  and  other  counterfeit  pieces,  obtain 
so  much  credit  with  some  as  to  be  received  into  the  canon,  if 
the  evidence  of  this  light  were  either  universal  or  infallible  of 
and  by  itself?  And  this  though  I  cannot  approve,  yet  me- 
thinks  you  may,  and  upon  probable  grounds  at  least :  for  I 
hope  no  °  Romanist  will  deny  but  that  there  is  as  much  light 
in  scripture  to  manifest  and  make  ostention  of  itself  to  be 
infallibly  the  written  word  of  God,  as  there  is  in  any  tradition 
of  the  church  that  it  is  divine,  and  infallibly  the  unwritten 
word  of  God.  And  the  scriptures  saying  from  the  mouths  of 
the  prophets,  vThus  saith  the  Lord,  and  from  the  mouths  of 
the  apostles,  that  ^the  Holy  Ghost  spake  by  them,  are  at  least 
as  able  and  as  fit  to  bear  witness  to  their  own  verity  as  the 
church  is  to  bear  witness  to  her  own  traditions  by  bare 
saying  they  come  from  the  apostles:  and  yourselves  would 
never  go  to  the  scripture  to  prove  that  there  are  r  traditions, 
as  you  do,  if  you  did  not  think  the  scripture  as  easy  to  be 
discovered  by  inbred  light  in  itself  as  traditions  by  their 
light.  And  if  this  be  so,  then  it  is  as  probable  at  the  least 
(which  some  of  ours  affirm)  that  scripture  may  be  known  to 
be  the  word  of  God  by  the  light  and  lustre  which  it  hath  in 
itself,  as  it  is  (which  you  s  affirm)  that  a  tradition  may  be 
known  to  be  such  by  the  light  which  it  hath  in  itself;  which 
is  an  excellent  proposition  to  make  sport  withal,  were  this  an 
argument  to  be  handled  merrily, 

XL — 3.  For  the  third  opinion  and  way  of  proving;  either 
some  think  that  there  is  no  sufficient  warrant  for  this,  unless 

m  Euseb.  lib.  ii.  c.  27.  fine,  edit.  Basil,  by  its  own  light  shews  itself  to  be  infal- 

1549.  libly  assisted,"  &c.  p.  52. 

"  Euseb.  lib.  iii.  c.  25.  P  Isa.  xliv.  et  passim. 

o  Except  A.  C.,  whose  boldness  herein         q  Acts  xxviii.  25. 
I  cannot  but  pity:  for  he  denies  this         r  2  Thess.  ii.  15.    Jude,  ver.  3. 
light  to  the  scripture,  and  gives  it  to         s  In  your  articles  delivered  to  D.  W. 

tradition.     His  words  are,  "  Tradition  to  be  answered  ;  and  A.  C.  p.  52. 
of  the  church  is  of  a  company,  which 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  59 

they  fetch  it  from  the  testimony  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  so  Sect.  16. 
look  in  vain  after  special  revelations,  and  make  themselves  by 
this  very  conceit  obnoxious  and  easy  to  be  led  by  all  the 
whisperings  of  a  seducing  private  spirit,  or  else  you  would 
fain  have  them  think  so :  for  your  side,  both  upon  this  and 
other  occasions,  do  often  challenge  that  we  resolve  all  our 
faith  into  the  dictates  of  a  *  private  spirit;  from  which  we 
shall  ever  prove  ourselves  as  free  if  not  freer  than  you.  To 
the  question  in  hand  then :  suppose  it  agreed  upon  that  there 
must  be  a  u  divine  faith,  cui  subesse  non  potest  falsum,  under 
which  can  rest  no  possible  error,  that  the  books  of  scripture 
are  the  written  word  of  God ;  if  they  which  go  to  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  proof  of  this  do  mean  by  faith 
objection  fidm,  the  object  of  faith  that  is  to  be  believed,  then, 
no  question,  they  are  out  of  the  ordinary  way ;  for  God 
never  sent  us  by  any  word  or  warrant  of  his  to  look  for  any 
such  special  and  private  testimony  to  prove  which  that  book 
is  that  we  must  believe :  but  if  by  faith  they  mean  the  habit 
or  act  of  divine  infused  faith,  by  which  virtue  they  do  believe 
the  credible  object  and  thing  to  be  believed,  then  their  speech 
is  true  and  confessed  by  all  divines  of  all  sorts :  for  faith  is 
the  xgift  of  God,  of  God  alone,  and  an  7 infused  habit,  in 
respect  whereof  the  soul  is  merely  recipient ;  and  therefore 
the  sole  infuser,  the  Holy  Ghost,  must  not  be  excluded  from 
that  work  which  none  can  do  but  he  :  for  the  Holy  Ghost,  as 
2  he  first  dictated  the  scripture  to  the  apostles,  "aso  did  he 

t  A  Jesuit,  under  the  name  of  T.  S.,  manis.    Ad  quern  modum  et  Saraceni 

set  out  a  book,  anno  1630,  which  he  suis  praeceptoribus,  et  Judaei  suis  rabi- 

called,  The  Trial  of  the  Protestant  pri-  nis,  et  gentes  suis  philosophis,  et  omnes 

vate  Spirit.  suis  majoribus  inhaerent :  non  sic  Chris- 

i  Ut  testimoiiia  scripturse  certam  et  tiani,  sed  per  interius  lumen  infusum  a 

indubitatam    fidem    prsestent,   riecessa-  Spiritu  Sancto,  quo  nrmissime  et  cer- 

riam  videtur  ostendere,  quod  ipsae  divi-  tissime   moventur   ad  credendum,  &c. 

nae  scripturae  sint  Dei  Spiritu  inspiratae.  Canus,  Locor.  lib.  ii.   c.  8.   §.  Jam  si 

Orig.  4.  Trepi  apxwv.  hsec. 

x  i  Cor.  xii.  3, 4.    Datur  nobis  a  Deo,         z  "  The  Holy  Ghost  spake  by  the 

&c.   S.  August,  in  Psal.  Ixxxvii.  prophets,"  &c.    Symb.  Nicen.  et  i  Pet. 

y   Quia   homo   assentiendo   eis  quae  ii.  21. — Quis  modus  est,  quo  doces  ani- 

sunt  fidei  elevatur  supra  natui-am  suam,  mas  ea  quae  futura  sunt  ?  Docuisti  enim 

oportet,  quod  hoc  insit  ei  ex  supernatu-  prophetas    tuos.     S.  August.    Confess, 

rali  principio  interius  moveute,  quod  est  lib.  xi.  c.  19. 

Deus.  Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  6.  A.  i.  c.    And         a  Nee  enim  ecclesire  testimonium  aut 

your  own  divines   agree  in  this,  that  judicium  praedicamus,  Dei  Spiritura,  vel 

fides  acquisita  is  not  sufficient  for  any  ab  ecclesia  docente,  vel  a  nobis  audien- 

article,  but  there  must  be  fides  infu&a  tibus,  excludimus,  sed  utrobique  diserte 

before   there   can  be  divine   certainty,  includimus,  &c.  Stapl.  Trip.  cont.  Whi- 

Fides  acquisita  innititur  conjecturis  hu-  tak.  c.  3. 

60  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  not  leave  the  church  in  general,  nor  the  true  members  of  it 
in  particular,  without  grace  to  believe  what  himself  had 
revealed  and  made  credible :"  so  that  faith,  as  it  is  taken  for 
the  virtue  of  faith,  whether  it  be  of  this  or  any  other  article, 
" b  though  it  receive  a  kind  of  preparation  or  occasion  of 
beginning  from  the  testimony  of  the  church,  as  it  proposeth 
and  induceth  to  the  faith,  yet  it  ends  in  God,  revealing  within 
and  teaching  within  that  which  the  church  preached  without :" 
for  till  the  Spirit  of  God  move  the  heart  of  man,  he  cannot 
believe,  be  the  object  never  so  credible.  The  speech  is  true 
then,  but  quite  cout  of  the  state  of  this  question,  which  in- 
quires only  after  a  sufficient  means  to  make  this  object  credi- 
ble and  fit  to  be  believed  against  all  impeachment  of  folly  and 
temerity  in  belief,  whether  men  do  actually  believe  it  or  not ; 
for  which  no  man  may  expect  inward  private  revelation  with- 
out the  external  means  of  the  church,  unless  perhaps  the 
dcase  of  necessity  be  excepted,  when  a  man  lives  in  such  a 
time  and  place  as  excludes  him  from  all  ordinary  means ;  in 
which  I  dare  not  offer  to  shut  up  God  from  the  souls  of  men, 
nor  to  tie  him  to  those  ordinary  ways  and  means  to  which 
yet  in  great  wisdom  and  providence  he  hath  tied  and  bound 
all  mankind. 

XII. — Private  revelation  then  hath  nothing  ordinarily  to 
do  to  make  the  object  credible  in  this,  that  scripture  is  the 
word  of  God,  or  in  any  other  article.  For  the  question  is 
of  such  outward  and  evident  means  as  other  men  may  take 
notice  of  as  well  as  ourselves ;  by  which,  if  there  arise  any 
doubting  or  infirmity  in  the  faith,  others  may  strengthen  us, 
or  we  afford  means  to  support  them;  whereas  the  "etesti- 

b  Fides  quae  cnepit  ab  ecclesiae  testi-  solo  dono  gratuito  infusus  est :  nihil  ad 

monio,  quatenus  proponit  et  inducit  ad  quaestionem  :   nisi,  quoad  hoc  quod  per 

fidem,  desinit  in  Deo  intus  revelante,  et  scripturte  inspectionem,   &c.     Henr.   a 

intus  docente  quod  foris  ecclesia  praedi-  Gand.  Sum.  A.  10.  q.  i.  lit.  D. 

cavit.  Stapl.  Relect.  Coiit.  4.  q. 3.  A.  2 —  d  Stapleton,  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q. 3.  A.  2, 

"When  grave  and  learned  men  do  some-  doth  not  only  affirm  it,  but  proves  it 

times  hold  that  of  this  principle  there  is  too,  a  paritate  rationis,  in  case  of  iieces- 

no  proof  but  by  the  testimony  of  the  sity,  where  there  is  no  contempt  of  the 

Spirit,  &c.  I  think  it  is  not  their  mean-  external  means. 

ing  to  exclude  all  outward  proofs,  &c.  e  Quid  cum  singulis  agitur,  Deus  scit 

but  rather  this,  That  all  other  means  qui   agit,    et   ipsi   curn    quibus   agitur, 

are  uneffectual  of  themselves  to  work  sciunt.    Quid  autem  agatur  cum  genere 

faith  without  the  special  grace  of  God,"  humann,  per  historian!  commendari  vo- 

&c.    Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  8.  luit,  et  per  prophetiam.    S.  August,  de 

c  De  habitu  fidei  quoad  fieri  ejus  et  vera  Relig.  c.  25. 
generationem    cum    a    Deo    immediate 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  61 

mony  of  the  Spirit  and  all  private  revelation  is  within,  nor  Sect.  1 6. 
felt  nor  seen  of  any  but  of  him  that  hath  it ;"  so  that  hence 
can  be  drawn  no  proof  to  others.  And  miracles  are  not  suffi- 
cient alone  to  prove  it,  unless  both  they  and  the  revelation 
too  agree  with  the  rule  of  scripture,  which  is  now  an  unalter- 
able rule  by  fman  or  angel.  To  all  this  A.  C.  says  nothing,  A.  c.  p.  52. 
save  that  "  I  seem  not  to  admit  of  an  infallible  impulsion  of 
a  private  spirit  ex  parte  subject^  without  any  infallible  reason, 
and  that  sufficiently  applied  ex  parte  objecti ;  which  if  I  did 
admit  would  open  a  gap  to  all  enthusiasms  and  dreams  of 
fanatical  men."  Now  for  this  yet  I  thank  him ;  for  I  do  not 
only  "  seem  not  to  admit,"  but  I  do  most  clearly  reject  this 
phrensy  in  the  words  going  before. 

XIII. — 4.  The  last  way,  which  gives  s reason  leave  to  come 
in  and  prove  what  it  can,  may  not  justly  be  denied  by  any 
reasonable  man ;  for  though  reason  without  grace  cannot  see 
the  way  to  heaven,  nor  believe  this  book  in  which  God  hath 
written  the  way,  yet  grace  is  never  placed  but  in  a  reasonable 
creature,  and  proves,  by  the  very  seat  which  it  hath  taken  up, 
that  the  end  it  hath  is  to  be  spiritual  eye-water  to  make 
reason  see  what  by  h  nature  only  it  cannot,  but  never  to 
blemish  reason  in  that  which  it  can  comprehend.  Now  the 
use  of  reason  is  very  general ;  and  man  (do  what  he  can)  is 
still  apt  to  search  and  seek  for  a  reason  why  he  will  believe, 
though  after  he  once  believes,  his  faith  grows  j  stronger  than 
either  his  reason  or  his  knowledge  ;  and  great  reason  for  this, 

f  Gal.  i.  8.  lumine  divinae  scientiae,  quae  decipi  non 

g  Utitur  tamen  sacra  doctrina  ratione  potest.  Thorn,  p.  I.  q.  i,  A.  5.  c. — Ut 

humana,  non  quidem  ad  probandum  ipsa  fide  valentiores  facti,  quod  credirmis 

fidem  ipsam,  sed  ad  manifestandum  all-  intelligere  merearaur.  S.  August,  cont. 

qua  alia,  quae  traduntur  in  hac  doc-  Ep.  Manichaei,  dictam  Fundamentum, 

trina.  Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  r.  A.  8.  ad  2 0.14 Hoc  autem  ita  intelligendum  est, 

Passibus  rationis  novus  homo  tendit  in  ut  scieutia  certior  sit  certitudine  eviden- 

Deum.  S.  August,  de  vera  Relig.  c.  26.  tia? ;  fides  vero  certior  firmitate  adhae- 

( Passibus,  verum  est,  sed  nee  aequis,  nee  sionis.  Majus  lumen  in  scientia,  majus 

solis.) — Nam  invisibilia  Dei  altiori  modo  robur  in  fide.  Et  hoc,  quia  in  fide,  et 

quantum  ad  plura  percipit  fides,  quam  ad  fidem  actus  imperatus  voluntatis  con  - 

ratio  naturalis  ex  creaturis  in  Deum  currit.  Credere  enim  est  actus  intel- 

procedens.  Thorn.  2.  232.  q.  2.  A.  3.  lectus  ;  vero  assentientis  productus  ex 

ad  3.  voluntatis  imperio.  Biel.  in  3.  Sent. 

h  Animalis  homo  non  pereipit.  i  Cor.  d.  23.  q.  2.  A.  i — Unde  Thorn.,  Intel- 

ii.  14.  lectus  credentis  determinatur  ad  urium, 

i  Quia  scientiae  certitudinem  habent  non  per  rationem,  sed  per  voluntatem ; 

ex  naturali  lumine  rationis  humanae,  et  ideo  assensus  hie  accipitur  pro  actu 

quse  potest  errare:  theologia  autem  (quae  intellectus,  secundum  quod  a  voluntate 

docet  et  objectum  et  notitiam  fidei,  sicut  determinatur  ad  uuum.  2.  2ae.  q.  2. 

et  fidem  ipsam)  certitudinem  habet  ex  A.  i.  ad  3. 

62  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  because  it  goes  higher,  and  so  upon  a  safer  principle  than 
either  of  the  other  can  in  this  life. 

XIV. — In  this  particular  the  books  called  the  scripture 
are  commonly  and  constantly  reputed  to  be  the  word  of  God, 
and  so,  infallible  verity  to  the  least  point  of  them.  Doth  any 
man  doubt  this?  the  world  cannot  keep  him  from  going  to 
weigh  it  at  the  balance  of  reason,  whether  it  be  the  word  of 
God  or  not.  To  the  same  weights  he  brings  the  tradition  of 
the  church,  the  inward  motives  in  scripture  itself,  all  testimo- 
nies within  which  seem  to  bear  witness  to  it.  And  in  all  this 
there  is  no  harm  :  the  danger  is  when  a  man  will  use  no  other 
scale  but  reason,  or  prefer  reason  before  any  other  scale  :  for 
the  word  of  God  and  the  book  containing  it  refuse  not  to 
be  weighed  by  k reason;  but  the  scale  is  not  large  enough  to 
contain,  nor  the  weights  to  measure  out  the  true  virtue  and 
full  force  of  either.  Reason  then  can  give  no  supernatural 
ground  into  which  a  man  may  resolve  his  faith  that  scripture 
is  the  word  of  God  infallibly ;  yet  reason  can  go  so  high  as  it 
can  prove  that  Christian  religion  which  rests  upon  the  au- 
thority of  this  book  stands  upon  surer  grounds  of  nature, 
reason,  common  equity,  and  justice,  than  any  thing  in  the 
world  which  any  infidel  or  mere  naturalist  hath  done,  doth, 
or  can  adhere  unto  against  it,  in  that  which  he  makes, 
accounts,  or  assumes  as  religion  to  himself. 

XV. — The  ancient  Fathers  relied  upon  the  scriptures,  no 
Christians  more ;  and  having  to  do  with  philosophers,  (men 
very  well  seen  in  all  the  subtilties  which  natural  reason  could 
teach  or  learn,)  they  were  often  put  to  it,  and  did  as  often 
make  it  good,  that  they  had  sufficient  warrant  to  rely  so 
much  as  they  did  upon  scripture.  In  all  which  disputes, 
because  they  were  to  deal  with  infidels,  they  did  labour  to 
make  good  the  authority  of  the  book  of  God  by  such  argu- 
ments as  unbelievers  themselves  could  not  but  think  reason- 
able, if  they  weighed  them  with  indifferency.  For  though  I 
set  the  mysteries  of  faith  above  reason,  which  is  their  proper 
place,  yet  I  would  have  no  man  think  they  contradict  reason 
or  the  principles  thereof:  no  sure;  for  reason  by  her  own 

fc  Si  vobis,  rationi,  et  veritati  consen-  nis,  &c.  Tertull.  lib.  de  Carne  Christi, 

tanea   videntur,  in  pretio  habete,  &c.  c.  18. — Rationabile  est  credere  Detim 

Justin.  Mart,  de  Mysteriis  Religionis,  esse  autorem  scripturae.   Henr.  a  Gand. 

Apol.  2. — Igitur,  si  fuit  dispositio  ratio-  Sum.  torn.  i.  Art.  9.  q.  3. 

ake  . 

am-  \^  YllA*  fytf 
,  or 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  03 

light  can  discover  how  firmly  the  principles  of  religion  are  Sect.  1  6. 
true,  but  all  the  light  she  hath  will  never  be  able  to  find  them 
false.  Nor  may  any  man  think  that  the  principles  of  religion, 
even  this,  That  the  scriptures  are  the  word  of  God,  are  so 
indifferent  to  a  natural  eye,  that  it  may  with  as  just  cause 
lean  to  one  part  of  the  contradiction  as  to  the  other;  for 
though  this  truth,  That  scripture  is  the  word  of  God,  is  not 
so  demonstratively  evident  a  priori  as  to  enforce  assent,  yet 
it  is  strengthened  so  abundantly  with  probable  arguments, 
both  from  the  light  of  nature  itself  and  human  testimony, 
that  he  must  be  very  wilful  and  self-  conceited  that  shall  dare 
to  suspect  it. 

XVI.  —  Nay,  yet  farther,  ullt  is  not  altogether  impossible 
to  prove  it,  even  by  reason,  a  truth  infallible,  or  else  to  make 
them  deny  some  apparent  principle  of  their  own."  For  exam 
pie  ;  it  is  an  apparent  principle,  and  with  them,  That  God 
the  absolute,  prime  Agent,  cannot  be  forced  out  of  any  pos- 
session ;  for  if  he  could  be  forced  by  another  greater,  he  were 
neither  prince,  nor  absolute,  nor  mGod,  in  their  own  theology. 
Now  they  must  grant  that  that  God  and  Christ  which  the 
scripture  teaches  and  we  believe  is  the  only  true  God,  and 
no  other  with  him,  and  so  deny  the  deity  which  they  wor- 
shipped, or  else  deny  their  own  principle  about  the  Deity, 
That  God  cannot  be  commanded  and  forced  out  of  possession. 
For  ""their  gods,  Saturn,  and  Serapis,  and  Jupiter  himself, 
have  been  adjured  by  the  name  of  the  true  and  only  God,  and 
have  been  forced  out  of  the  bodies  they  possessed,  and  con- 
fessed themselves  to  be  foul  and  seducing  devils  :  and  their 
confession  was  to  be  supposed  true  in  point  of  reason  ;  for 
they  that  were  adored  as  gods  would  never  belie  themselves 
into  devils  to  their  own  reproach,  especially  in  the  presence 
of  them  that  worshipped  them,  were  they  not  forced."  This 
many  of  the  unbelievers  saw;  therefore  they  could  not  (in 

I  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  8  __  ter,  et  quicquid  daemonum  colitis,  victi 

Si  Plato  ipse  viveret,  et  me  interro-  dolore  quod  sum,  eloquuntur.  Nee  uti- 

gantem  iion  aspernaretur,  &c.  S.  Au-  que  in  turpitudinem  sui  noimullis  prae- 

gust.  de  vera  Ilelig.  c.  3.  —  Videamus  sertim  vestrorum  assistentibus,  menti- 

quatenus  ratio  potest  progredi  a  visibi-  untur.  Ipsis  testibus  esse  eos  daemones 

libus  ad  invisibilia,  &c.  Ibid.  c.  29.  de  se  verum  confitentibus  credite.  Ad- 

m  Si  vim  spectes,  Deus  valentissimus  jurati  enim  per  Deum  verum,  et  solum 

est.  Arist.  de  Mundo,  c.  7  __  Domini  et  inviti,  &c.  Arnob.  contra  Gent.  8,  or 

moderatores  omnium.  Cic.  de  Leg.  2.         Minutius  Felix  .as  is  now  thought. 

i.»  JL  J 1 1 II  tl  U  O     A'  C11JV     *Cl>0    13    lAVW       lUlSUglAV* 

n  Ipse  Saturnus,  et  Serapis,  et  Jupi- 

64  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  very  force  of  reason)  but  they  must  either  deny  their  god  or 
deny  their  principle  in  nature.  Their  long  custom  would  not 
forsake  their  god,  and  their  reason  could  not  forget  their 
principle.  If  reason  therefore  might  judge  among  them,  they 
could  not  worship  any  thing  that  was  under  command :  and 
if  it  be  reasonable  to  do  and  believe  this,  then  why  not  rea- 
sonable also  to  believe  that  scripture  is  his  word,  given  to 
teach  himself  and  Christ,  since  there  they  find  Christ  °  doing 
that,  and  P  giving  power  to  do  it  after,  which  themselves  saw 
executed  upon  their  devil-gods  ? 

XVII. — Besides,  whereas  all  other  written  laws  have  scarce 
had  the  honour  to  be  duly  observed  or  constantly  allowed 
worthy  approbation  in  the  particular  places  where  they  have 
been  established  for  laws,  this  law  of  Christ,  and  this  canon 
of  scripture,  the  container  of  it,  is  or  hath  been  received  in 
almost  nail  nations  under  heaven:  and  wheresoever  it  hath 
been  received,  it  hath  been  both  approved  for  unchangeable 
good  and  believed  for  infallible  verity.  This  persuasion  could 
not  have  been  wrought  in  men  of  all  sorts  but  by  working 
upon  their  reason,  unless  we  shall  think  all  the  world  unrea- 
sonable that  received  it :  and  certainly  God  did  not  give  this 
admirable  faculty  of  reasoning  to  the  soul  of  man  for  any 
cause  more  prime  than  this,  to  discover  or  to  judge  and  allow 
(within  the  sphere  of  its  own  activity,  and  not  presuming 
farther)  of  the  way  to  himself,  when  and  howsoever  it  should 
be  discovered. 

XVIII. — One  great  thing  that  troubled  rational  men  was 
that  which  stumbled  the  Manichee,  (an  heresy  it  was  but 
more  than  half  pagan,)  namely,  "  That  somewhat  must  be 
believed  before  much  could  be  known."  Wise  men  use  not  to 
believe  but  what  they  know ;  and  the  Manichee  r  scorned  the 
orthodox  Christian  as  light  of  belief,  promising  to  lead  no 
disciple  after  him  but  upon  evident  knowledge.  This  stum- 

o  Matt.  xii.  22.  authoritate  subjecit.   S.August,  de  Civ. 

P  Matt.  xvi.  17.  Dei,  xi.  i. — At  in  omni  orbe  terrarum, 

Q    Si   libri   quoquo  modo  se   habent  in  omni  Grsecia,  et  universis  nationibus, 

sancti   tamen   divinarum   rerum    pleni  innumeri  sunt,  et  immensi,  qui  relictis 

prope  totius  generis  humani  confessione  patriis    legibus,    &c.    ad    observantiam 

diffamantur,  &c.     S.  August,  de  Util.  Mosis  et  Christi,  &c.    Origen.  irfpl  ap~ 

Cred.  c.  7. — Scriptura  summa  disposi-  X®v->  lv-  r* 

tione  providentiae  super  omnes  omnium         r  Irridere  in  catholicae  fidei  discipline, 

gentium  liters,  omnia  sibi  genera  inge-  quod  juberentur  homines  credere,  non 

niorum   humanorum    diviria    excellens  autem,  &c.    S.  August.  Retract,  i.  14- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  65 

bles  many ;  but  yet  the  principle,  That  somewhat  must  be  Sect.  1 6. 
believed  before  much  can  be  known,  stands  firm  in  reason 
still :  for  if  in  all  sciences  there  be  some  principles  which  can- 
not be  proved ;  if  reason  be  able  to  see  this  and  confess  it ; 
if  almost  all  artists  have  granted  it ;  if  in  the  mathematics, 
where  are  the  exactest  demonstrations,  there  be  qucedam 
postulate  some  things  to  be  first  demanded  and  granted  be- 
fore the  demonstration  can  proceed;  who  can  justly  deny 
that  to  divinity,  a  science  of  the  highest  object,  God  himself, 
which  he  easily  and  reasonably  grants  to  inferior  sciences, 
which  are  more  within  his  reach  ?  And  as  all  sciences  suppose 
some  principles  without  proving,  so  have  they  almost  all  some 
text,  some  authority  upon  which  they  rely  in  some  measure : 
and  it  is  reason  they  should  ;  for  though  these  sciences  make 
not  their  texts  infallible,  as  divinity  doth,  yet  full  consent, 
and  prudent  examination,  and  long  continuance,  have  won 
reputation  to  them  and  settled  reputation  upon  them  very 
deservedly.  And  were  these  texts  more  void  of  truth  than 
they  are,  yet  it  were  fit  and  reasonable  to  uphold  their  credit, 
that  novices  and  young  beginners  in  a  science,  which  are  not 
able  to  work  strongly  upon  reason,  nor  reason  upon  them, 
may  have  authority  to  believe  till  they  can  learn  to  conclude 
from  principles,  and  so  to  know.  Is  this  also  reasonable  in 
other  sciences,  and  shall  it  not  be  so  in  theology,  to  have  a 
text,  a  scripture,  a  rule,  which  novices  may  be  taught  first  to 
believe,  that  so  they  may  after  come  to  the  knowledge  of 
those  things  which  out  of  this  rich  principle  and  s  treasure  are 
deducible?  I  yet  see  not  how  right  reason  can  deny  these 
grounds :  and  if  it  cannot,  then  a  mere  natural  man  may  be 
thus  far  convinced  that  the  text  of  God  is  a  very  credible 

XIX. — Well,  these  are  the  four  ways  by  most  of  which 
men  offer  to  prove  the  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God,  as  by 
a  divine  and  infallible  warrant.  And,  it  seems,  no  one  of 
these  doth  it  alone.  The  tradition  of  the  present  church  is 

s  And   therefore   St.  Augustine,  de  taxat ;  no  question  but  to  make  them 

Doct.  Christ,   ii.  8,  would   have   men  ready  against  they  understood  it;  and 

make  themselves  perfect  in  reading  the  as    schoolmasters   make   their   scholars 

letter  of  the  scripture  even  before  they  con  their  grammar  rules  by  heart,  that 

understood  it :    Eas  riotas  habeat,  etsi  they  may  be  ready  for  their  use  when 

nondum  intellectu,  tamen  lectione  dun-  they  better  understand  them. 

66  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  too  weak,  because  that  is  not  absolutely  divine :  the  light 
which  is  in  scripture  itself  is  not  bright  enough,  it  cannot 
bear  sufficient  witness  to  itself:  the  testimony  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  that  is  most  infallible,  but  ordinarily  it  is  not  so  much 
as  considerable  in  this  question,  which  is  not  how  or  by  what 
means  we  believe,  but  how  the  scripture  may  be  proposed  as 
a  credible  object  fit  for  belief:  and  for  reason,  no  man  expects 
that  that  should  prove  it ;  it  doth  service  enough,  if  it  enable 
us  to  disprove  that  which  misguided  men  conceive  against  it. 
If  none  of  these  then  be  an  absolute  and  sufficient  means  to 
prove  it,  either  we  must  find  out  another,  or  see  what  can  be 
more  wrought  out  of  these.  And  to  all  this  again  A.  C. 
says  nothing. 

XX. — For  the  tradition  of  the  church  then,  certain  it  is 
we  must  distinguish  the  church  before  we  can  judge  right  of 
the  validity  of  the  tradition  :  for  if  the  speech  be  of  the  prime 
Christian  church,  the  apostles,  disciples,  and  such  as  had 
immediate  revelation  from  heaven,  no  question  but  the  voice 
and  tradition  of  this  church  is  divine,  not  aliquo  modo,  in  a 
sort,  but  simply  ;  and  the  word  of  God  from  them  is  of  like 
validity  written  or  delivered.  And  against  this  tradition  (of 
which  kind  this,  That  the  books  of  scripture  are  the  word  of 
God,  is  the  most  general  and  uniform)  the  church  of  England 
never  excepted.  And  when  l  St.  Augustine  said,  "  I  would 
not  believe  the  gospel  unless  the  authority  of  the  catholic 
church  moved  me,"  (which  place  you  urged  at  the  conference, 
though  you  are  now  content  to  slide  by  it,)  some  of  your  own 
will  not  endure  should  be  understood  save  u  of  the  church  in 
the  time  of  the  apostles  only,  and  xsome  of  the  church  in 
general,  not  excluding  afterages ;  but  sure  to  include  Christ 
and  his  apostles :  and  the  certainty  is  there,  abundance  of 
certainty  in  itself;  but  how  far  that  is  evident  to  us  shall 
after  appear. 

XXI. — But  this  will  not  serve  your  turn.  The  tradition 
of  the  present  church  must  be  as  infallible  as  that  of  the 

t  Cont.  Epis.  Fund.  lib.  i.  c.  5.    Ego  p.  i.  lib.  i.  c.  4. 

vero  non  crederem  evangelic,  nisi  me  ca-         x  Biel.  lect.  22.  in  C.  Missse.  A  tem- 

tholicae  ecclesiae  commoveret  authoritas.  pore  Christi  et  apostolorum,  &c.     And 

u  Intelligitur  solum  de  ecclesia  qnae  so  doth  St.  Augustine  take  Eccles.  con- 

fnit  tempore apostolorum.  Ocham.  Dial,  tra  Fund, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  67 

primitive :  but  the  contrary  to  this  is  proved  y  before,  because  Sect.  16. 
this  voice  of  the  present  church  is  not  simply  divine.  To 
what  end  then  serves  any  tradition  of  the  present  church  \ 
To  what  ?  why,  to  a  very  good  end.  For,  first,  it  serves  by 
a  full  consent  to  work  upon  the  minds  of  unbelievers,  to  move 
them  to  read  and  to  consider  the  scripture,  which  (they  hear 
by  so  many  wise,  learned,  and  devout  men)  is  of  no  meaner 
esteem  than  the  word  of  God.  And,  secondly,  it  serves 
among  novices,  weaklings,  and  doubters  in  the  faith,  to  in- 
struct and  confirm  them,  till  they  may  acquaint  themselves 
with  and  understand  the  scripture,  which  the  church  delivers 
as  the  word  of  God.  And  thus  again  some  of  your  own 
understand  the  forecited  place  of  St.  Augustine,  "  I  would 
not  believe  the  gospel"  &c.;  zfor  he  speaks  it  either  of  novices 
or  doubters  in  the  faith,  or  else  of  such  as  were  in  part  infi- 
dels. You  at  the  conference  (though  you  omit  it  here)  would 
needs  have  it  that  St.  Augustine  spake  even  of  the  a faithful, 
which  I  cannot  yet  think;  for  he  speaks  to  the  Manichees, 
and  they  had  a  great  part  of  the  infidel  in  them.  And  the 
words  immediately  before  these  are,  "  If  thou  shouldest  find 
one,  qui  evangelio  nondwn  credit,  which  did  not  yet  believe  the 
gospel,  what  wouldest  thou  do  to  make  him  believe?"  ^Ego 
vero  non,  "  Truly  I  would  not"  &c.  So  to  these  two  ends  it 
serves,  and  there  need  be  no  question  between  us.  But  then, 
every  thing  that  is  the  first  inducer  to  believe  is  not  by  and 
by  either  the  principal  motive  or  the  chief  and  last  object  of 
belief  upon  which  a  man  may  rest  his  faith ;  unless  we  shall 
be  of  c  Jacobus  Almain^s  opinion,  that  we  are  per  prius  et 

y  Sect.  1 6.  num.  VI.  he  speaks  of  himself  when  he  did  not 

z  Sive  infideles,  sive  in  fide  novitii.  believe. 

Canus,  Loc.  lib.  ii.  c.  8. — Neganti,  aut         c  Certum  est  quod  tenemur  credere 

omnino  nescienti  scripturam.  Stapl.  Re-  omnibus  contends  in  sacro  canone,  quia 

lect.  Cont.  4.  q.  i.  A.  3.  ecclesia  credit  ex  ea  ratione  solum.  Ergo 

a   Quid   si    fateamur    fideles    etiam  per  prius  et  magis  tenemur  credere  ec- 

ecclesiae  authoritate  commoveri,  ut  scrip-  clesiae  quam  evangelio.    Almain.  in  3. 

turas  recipiant  ?  non  tamen  inde  sequi-  Dist.  24.  Conclus.  6.  dub.  6.     And,  to 

tur  eos  hoc  modo   penitus  persuaderi,  make  a  show  of  proof  for  this,  he  falsi- 

aut  nulla  alia  fortioreque  ratione  induci.  fies  St.  Augustine  most  notoriously,  and 

Quis  autem  Christianus  est,  quern  ec-  reads   that  known   place,  not  nisi   me 

clesia  Christi,  commendans  scripturam  commoveret,  (as  all  read  it,)  but  compel- 

Christi,noncommoveat?  Whitak.  Disp.  leret.     Patet;   quia   dicit   Augustinus, 

de  Sacra  Scriptura,  Cont.  i.  q.  3.  c.  8.  evangelio  non  crederem,  nisi  ad  hoc  me 

ubi  citat  locum  hunc  S.  August.  compelleret  ecclesiae    authoritas.     Ibid. 

b  Et  ibid.    Quibus  obtemperavi  di-  And  so  also  Gerson  reads  it,  in  Decla- 

centibus  Credite  evangelio.     Therefore  rat.  Veritatum  quae  credendae  sunt,  &c. 

F  2 

68  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  magis,  first  and  more  bound  to  believe  the  church  than  the 
gospel;  which  your  own  learned  men,  as  you  may  see  by 
dMel.  Canus,  reject  as  extreme  foul,  and  so  indeed  it  is.  The 
first  knowledge  then  (after  the  quid  nominis  is  known  by 
grammar)  that  helps  to  open  a  man's  understanding,  and 
prepares  him  to  be  able  to  demonstrate  a  truth  and  make  it 
evident,  is  his  logic  ;  but  when  he  hath  made  a  demonstra- 
tion, he  resolves  the  knowledge  of  his  conclusion,  not  into  his 
grammatical  or  logical  principles,  but  into  the  immediate 
principles  out  of  which  it  is  deduced.  So  in  this  particular, 
a  man  is  probably  led  by  the  authority  of  the  present  church, 
as  by  the  first  informing,  inducing,  persuading  means,  to  be- 
lieve the  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God  ;  but  when  he  hath 
studied,  considered,  and  compared  this  word  with  itself  and 
with  other  writings,  with  the  help  of  ordinary  grace,  and  a 
mind  morally  induced  and  reasonably  persuaded  by  the  voice 
of  the  church,  the  scripture  then  gives  greater  and  higher 
reasons  of  credibility  to  itself  than  tradition  alone  could  give. 
And  then  he  that  believes  resolves  his  last  and  full  assent — 
that  scripture  is  of  divine  authority — into  internal  arguments 
found  in  the  letter  itself,  though  found  by  the  help  and  direc- 
tion of  tradition  without  and  grace  within :  and  the  resolution 
that  is  rightly  grounded  may  not  endure  to  pitch  and  rest 
itself  upon  the  helps,  but  upon  that  divine  light  which  the 
scripture  no  question  hath  in  itself,  but  is  not  kindled  till 
these  helps  come.  ^Thy  word  is  a  light:  so  David.  A  light? 
therefore  it  is  as  much  manifestativum  sui  as  alterius,  a  mani- 
festation to  itself  as  to  other  things  which  it  shews ;  but  still, 
not  till  the  candle  be  lighted,  not  till  there  hath  been  a  pre- 
paring instruction  what  light  it  is.  Children  call  the  sun  and 
moon  candles,  God's  candles;  they  see  the  light  as  well  as 
men,  but  cannot  distinguish  between  them  till  some  tradition 
and  education  hath  informed  their  reason:  and  f animalis 
homo,  the  natural  man,  sees  some  light  of  moral  counsel  and 
instruction  in  scripture  as  well  as  believers ;  but  he  takes  all 

part.  i.  p.  414.  §•  3.     But  in  a  most  an-  e  Psal.  cxix.  105.     Sanctarum  scrip- 

cient  manuscript  in  Corpus  Christi  col-  turarum  lumen.  S.  August,  lib.  de  Vera 

lege    library  in  Cambridge,  the  words  Relig.  c.  7. — Quid  lucem  scripturarum 

are  nisi  me  commoveret,  &c.  vanis  umbris  ?   &c.    S.  August,  lib.  de 

d  Canus,  Loc.  lib.  ii.  c.  8    fol.  34.  b.  Mor.  Eccl.  Cathol.  c.  35. 

— Sect.  1 6.  num.  VI.  f  I  Cor.  ii.  14. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  69 

that  glorious  lustre  for  candlelight,  and  cannot  distinguish  Sect,  j  6. 
between  the  sun  and  twelve  to  the  pound,  till  tradition  of  the 
church,  and  God's  grace  put  to  it,  have  cleared  his  under- 
standing. So  tradition  of  the  present  church  is  the  first 
moral  motive  to  belief ;  but  the  belief  itself  that  the  scripture 
is  the  word  of  God  rests  Supon  the  scripture,  when  a  man 
finds  it  to  answer  and  exceed  all  that  which  the  church  gave 
in  testimony,  as  will  after  appear :  and  as  in  the  voice  of  the 
primitive  and  apostolical  church  there  was  h  simply  divine 
authority  delivering  the  scripture  as  God's  word,  so,  after 
tradition  of  the  present  church  hath  taught  and  informed  the 
soul,  the  voice  of  God  is  plainly  heard  in  scripture  itself.  And 
then  here  is  double  authority,  and  both  divine,  that  confirms 
scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God — tradition  of  the  apostles 
delivering  it,  and  the  internal  worth  and  argument  in  the 
scripture,  obvious  to  a  soul  prepared  by  the  present  church's 
tradition  and  God's  grace. 

XXII. — The  difficulties  which  are  pretended  against  this 
are  not  many,  and  they  will  easily  vanish.  For,  first,  you 
pretend  we  go  to  private  revelations  for  light  to  know  scrip- 
ture. No,  we  do  not,  you  see  it  is  excluded  out  of  the  very 
state  of  the  question  ;  and  we  go  to  the  tradition  of  the  pre- 
sent church,  and  by  it,  as  well  as  you.  Here  we  differ :  we 
use  the  tradition  of  the  present  church  as  the  first  motive, 
not  as  the  last  resolution  of  our  faith ;  we  resolve  only  into 
"prime  tradition  apostolical  and  scripture  itself. 

XXIII. — Secondly,  you  pretend  we  do  not  nor  cannot 
know  the  prime  apostolical  tradition  but  by  the  tradition  of 
the  present  church ;  and  that,  therefore,  if  the  tradition  of 
the  present  church  be  not  God's  unwritten  word,  and  divine, 
we  cannot  yet  know  scripture  to  be  scripture  by  a  divine 
authority.  Well,  suppose  I  could  not  know  the  prime  tra- 

g  Origen,  irepl  a.px<0>v  1.  iv.  c.  I,  went  spake,  ultimata   resolutio  Jidei  was   in 

this  way,  yet  was  he  a  great  deal  nearer  Deum,  not  in  ipsos  per  se,  much  more 

the  prime  tradition  than  we  are ;  for  shall  it  be  in  Deum  than  in  prcesentem 

being  to  prove  that  the  scriptures  were  ecclesiam,  and  into  the  writings  of  the 

inspired  from   God,  he  saith,  De   hoc  apostles  than  into  the  words  of  their 

assignabimus  ex  ipsis  divinis  scripturis,  successors  made  up  into  a  tradition, 
quae  nos  competenter  moverint,  &c.  *   Christiana    ecclesia    prophetarum 

h  Principaliter  tamen  (etiam  et  hie)  scriptis  et  apostolorum  prtedicatione  in- 

credimus  propter  Deum,  non  apostolos,  itio  fundata  fuit,  ubicunque  reperietur 

&c.    Henr.  a  Gand.  Sum.  A.  9.  q.  3.  ea  doctrina,  &c.    Calv.  Instit.  1.  i.  c.  5. 

Now  if,  where  the  apostles  themselves  §.2. 

70  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  dition  to  be  divine  but  by  the  present  church ;  yet  it  doth 
not  follow  that  therefore  I  cannot  know  scripture  to  be  the 
word  of  God  by  a  divine  authority,  because  divine  tradition  is 
not  the  sole  and  only  means  to  prove  it :  for  suppose  I  had 
not  nor  could  have  full  assurance  of  apostolical  tradition 
divine,  yet  the  moral  persuasion,  reason,  and  force  of  the 
present  church,  is  ground  enough  to  move  any  reasonable  man 
that  it  is  fit  he  should  read  the  scripture,  and  esteem  very 
reverently  and  highly  of  it ;  and  this  once  done,  the  scripture 
hath  then  in  and  home  arguments  enough  to  put  a  soul,  that 
hath  but  ordinary  grace,  out  of  doubt  that  scripture  is  the 
word  of  God,  infallible  and  divine. 

XXIV. — Thirdly,  you  pretend  that  we  make  the  scripture 
absolutely  and  fully  to  be  known  lumine  suo,\>y  the  light  and 
testimony  which  it  hath  in  and  gives  to  itself.  Against  this 
you  give  reason  for  yourselves  and  proof  from  us.  Your  rea- 
son is,  "  If  there  be  sufficient  light  in  scripture  to  shew  itself, 
then  every  man  that  can  and  doth  but  read  it  may  know  it 
presently  to  be  the  divine  word  of  God,  which  we  see  by  daily 
experience  men  neither  do  nor  can."  First,  it  is  not  abso- 
lutely nor  universally  true,  There  is  k  sufficient  light,  therefore 
every  man  may  see  it :  blind  men  are  men,  and  cannot  see  it ; 
and  ] sensual  men,  in  the  apostle's  judgment,  are  such:  nor 
may  we  deny  and  put  out  this  light  as  insufficient  because 
blind  eyes  cannot  and  perverse  eyes  will  not  see  it,  no  more 
than  we  may  deny  meat  to  be  sufficient  for  nourishment, 
though  men  that  are  heart-sick  cannot  eat  it.  Next,  we  do 
not  say  that  there  is  such  a  full  light  in  scripture  as  that 
every  man  upon  the  first  sight  must  yield  to  it,  such  light  as 
is  found  in  prime  principles ;  "  Every  whole  is  greater  than  a 
part  of  the  same ;"  and  this,  "  The  same  thing  cannot  be  and 
not  be  at  the  same  time  and  in  the  same  respect."  These 
carry  a  natural  light  with  them,  and  evident ;  for  the  terms 
are  no  sooner  understood  than  the  principles  themselves  are 
fully  known,  to  the  convincing  of  man's  understanding,  and 
so  they  are  the  beginning  of  knowledge ;  which,  where  it  is 
perfect,  dwells  in  full  light :  but  such  a  full  light  we  do  neither 

k  And  where  Hooker  uses  this  very     light,"   but,    "  if    that    light    be    evi- 
argument,  as  he  doth  b.  iii.  §.  8,  his     dent." 
•words  are  not,  "  If  there  be  sufficient        1  i  Cor.  ii.  14. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  71 

say  is,  nor  require  to  be  in  scripture  ;  and  if  any  particular  Sect.  16. 
man  do,  let  him  answer  for  himself.  The  question  is  only  of 
such  a  light  in  scripture  as  is  of  force  to  breed  faith  that  it 
is  the  word  of  God,  not  to  make  a  perfect  knowledge.  Now 
faith,  of  whatsoever  it  is,  this  or  other  principle,  is  an  m  evi- 
dence as  well  as  knowledge,  and  the  belief  is  firmer  than  any 
knowledge  can  be,  because  it  rests  upon  divine  authority, 
which  cannot  deceive  ;  whereas  knowledge  (or  at  least  he  that 
thinks  he  knows)  is  not  ever  certain  in  deductions  from  prin- 
ciples. "But  the  evidence  is  not  so  clear  ;  for  it  is  °  of  things 
not  seen.,  in  regard  of  the  object  ;  and  in  regard  of  the  subject 
that  sees,  it  is  Pin  cenigmate,  in  a  glass  or  dark  speaking. 
Now  God  doth  not  require  a  full  demonstrative  knowledge  in 
us  that  the  scripture  is  his  word,  and  therefore  in  his  provi- 
dence hath  kindled  in  it  no  light  for  that  ;  but  he  requires  our 
faith  of  it,  and  such  a  certain  demonstration  as  may  fit  that  : 
and  for  that  he  hath  left  sufficient  light  in  scripture  to  reason 
and  grace  meeting,  where  the  soul  is  morally  prepared  by 
the  tradition  of  the  church  ;  unless  you  be  of  q  Bellarmine's 
opinion,  "  That  to  believe  there  are  any  divine  scriptures  is 
not  omnino  necessary  to  salvation." 

Heb.  xi.  r.  And  if  he  means  by  omnino  that  it  is 

n  Sect.  1  6.  num.  XIII.  not  in  any  wise  necessary,  then  it  is 

o  Heb.  xi.  i.  sensibly  false;  for  the  greatest  uphold- 

P  i  Cor.  xiii.  12.      And    A.  C.    con-  ers  of  tradition  that  ever  were  made  the 

fesses,  p.  52,  that   this   very  thing   in  scripture  very  necessary  in  all  the  ages 

question  may  be  known  infallibly  when  of  the  church.     So  it  was  necessary  be- 

it  is  known  but  obscurely.     Et  Scotus  cause  it  was  given,  and  given  because 

in   3.   Dist.  23.  q.  i.   fol.  41.  B.    Hoc  God   thought   it   necessary.      Besides, 

modo  facile  est  videre,  quomodo  fides  upon    Roman   grounds,  this,   I   think, 

est  cum  aenigmate  et  obscuritate.    Quia  will  follow  :  That  which  the  tradition  of 

habitus  fidei  non  credit  articulum  esse  the  present  church  delivers  as  necessary 

verum  ex  evidentia  objecti,  sed  propter  to  believe,  is  omnino  necessary  to  salva- 

hoc  quod  assentit  veracitati  infundentis  tion  ;  but  that  there  are  divine  scrip- 

habitum,  et  in  hoc  revelantis  credibilia.  tures,  the  tradition  of  the  present  church 

Q  Credere  ullas  esse  divinas  scriptu-  delivers  as  necessary  to  believe  :  there- 

ras,  non  est  omnino  necessarium  ad  sa-  fore,  to  believe  there  are  divine  scrip- 

httem.  Bellarm.  de  Eccles.  lib.  iii.  c.  14.  tures   is   omnino  (be  the  sense  of  the 

I  will  not  break  my  discourse  to  rifle  word  what  it  can)  necessary  to  salva- 

this  speech  of  Bellarmine;    it  is  bad  tion.    So  Bellarmine  is  herein  foul,  and 

enough  in  the  best  sense  that  favour  unable  to  stand  upon  his  own  ground  ; 

itself  can  give  it.     For  if  he  mean  by  and  he  is  the  more,  partly  because  he 

omnino  that  it  is  not  altogether  or  sim-  avouches  this  proposition  for  truth  after 

ply  necessary  to  believe  there  is  divine  the  New  Testament  written,  and  partly 

scripture  and  a  written  word  of  God,  because  he  might  have  seen  the  state  of 

that  is  false,  that  being  granted  which  this  proposition  carefully  examined  by 

is  among  all  Christians,  that  there  is  a  Gandavo,  and  distinguished  by  times. 

scripture  :  and  God  would  never  have  Sum.  p.  i.  A.  8.  q.  4.  fine. 
given  a  supernatural  unnecessary  thing. 


72  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  XXV. — The  authority  which  you  pretend  against  this  is 
out  of  r  Hooker :  "  Of  things  necessary,  the  very  chiefest  is  to 
know  what  books  we  are  bound  to  esteem  holy ;  which  point 
is  confessed  impossible  for  the  scripture  itself  to  teach."  Of 
this  sBrerely  (the  storehouse  for  all  priests  that  will  be  idle 
and  yet  seem  well  read)  tells  us  that  ut  Hooker  gives  a  very 
sensible  demonstration :  '  It  is  not  the  word  of  God  which 
doth  or  possibly  can  assure  us  that  we  do  well  to  think  it  is 
his  word ;  for  if  any  one  book  of  scripture  did  give  testimony 
to  all,  yet  still  that  scripture  which  giveth  credit  to  the  rest 
would  require  another  to  give  credit  unto  it ;  nor  could  we 
ever  come  to  any  pause  to  rest  our  assurance  this  way :  so 
that  unless,  beside  scripture,  there  were  something  that  might 
assure,'"  &c.  And  "  uthis  he  acknowledged,"  saith  Brerely, 
"  is  the  authority  of  God's  church."  Certainly  Hooker  gives  a 
true  and  a  sensible  demonstration ;  but  Brerely  wants  fidelity 
and  integrity  in  citing  him ;  for,  in  the  first  place,  Hooker's 
speech  is,  "  Scripture  itself  cannot  teach  this ;"  nor  can  the 
truth  say  that  scripture  itself  can ;  it  must  needs  ordinarily 
have  tradition  to  prepare  the  mind  of  a  man  to  receive  it. 
And  in  the  next  place,  where  he  speaks  so  sensibly,  that 
scripture  cannot  bear  witness  to  itself,  nor  one  part  of  it 
to  another,  that  is  grounded  upon  nature,  which  admits  no 
created  thing  to  be  witness  to  itself,  and  is  acknowledged  by 
our  Saviour;  xlf  I  bear  witness  to  myself,  my  witness  is  not 
true,  that  is,  is  not  of  force  to  be  reasonably  accepted  for 
truth.  But  then  it  is  more  than  manifest  that  Hooker  deli- 
vers his  demonstration  of  scripture  alone;  for  if  scripture 
hath  another  proof,  nay,  many  other  proofs  to  usher  it  and 
lead  it  in,  then  no  question  it  can  both  prove  and  approve 
itself.  His  words  are,  "  So  that  unless,  besides  scripture, 
there  be"  &c.  "  Besides  scripture ;"  therefore  he  excludes 
not  scripture,  though  he  call  for  another  proof  to  lead  it  in, 
and  help  in  assurance,  namely,  tradition,  which  no  man  that 
hath  his  brains  about  him  denies.  In  the  two  other  places 
Brerely  falsifies  shamefully ;  for,  folding  up  all  that  Hooker 
says  in  these  words,  "  This  (other  means  to  assure  us  besides 

r  B.  i.  §.14.  u  B.  ii.  §.  7.  and  b.  iii.  §.  8. 

s  Protest.  Apol.  Tract,  i.  §.  10.  n.  3.          x  John  v.  31 ;   lie  speaks  of  himself 

t  B.  ii.  §.  4.  as  man.  John  viii.  13. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  73 

scripture)  is  the  authority  of  God's  church,""  he  wrinkles  that  Sect.  16. 
worthy  author  desperately,  and  shrinks  up  his  meaning.  For 
in  the  former  place  abused  by  Brerely,  no  man  can  set  a  better 
state  of  the  question  between  scripture  and  tradition  than 
Hooker  doth  :  his  words  are  these ;  "  y  The  scripture  is  the 
ground  of  our  belief ;  the  authority  of  man  (that  is  the  name 
he  gives  to  tradition)  is  the  key  which  opens  the  door  of 
entrance  into  the  knowledge  of  the  scripture."  I  ask  now, 
When  a  man  is  entered  and  hath  viewed  a  house,  and  upon 
viewing  likes  it,  and  upon  liking  resolves  unchangeably  to 
dwell  there,  doth  he  set  up  his  resolution  upon  the  key  that 
let  him  in  I  No  sure,  but  upon  the  goodness  and  commodious- 
ness  which  he  sees  in  the  house.  And  this  is  all  the  difference 
(that  I  know)  between  us  in  this  point;  in  which  do  you 
grant  (as  you  ought  to  do)  that  we  resolve  our  faith  into 
scripture  as  the  ground,  and  we  will  never  deny  that  tradition 
is  the  key  that  lets  us  in.  In  the  latter  place  Hooker  is  as 
plain  as  constant  to  himself  and  truth  :  his  words  are ;  "  z  The 
first  outward  motive  leading  men  so  to  esteem  of  the  scrip- 
ture is  the  authority  of  God's  church,"  &c.  "  But  afterwards, 
the  more  we  bestow  our  labour  in  reading  or  learning  the 
mysteries  thereof,  the  more  we  find  that  the  thing  itself  doth 
answer  our  received  opinion  concerning  it ;  so  that  the  former 
inducement,  prevailing  somewhat  with  us  before,  doth  now 
much  more  prevail,  when  the  very  thing  hath  ministered  fur- 
ther reason."  Here  then  again,  in  his  judgment,  tradition  is 
the  first  inducement,  but  the  further  reason  and  ground  is 
the  scripture.  And  resolution  of  faith  ever  settles  upon  the 
furthest  reason  it  can,  not  upon  the  first  inducement.  So 
that  the  state  of  this  question  is  firm,  and  yet  plain  enough 
to  him  that  will  not  shut  his  eyes. 

XXVI. — Now  here,  after  a  long  silence,  A.  C.  thrusts  him-A.C.  p.  52. 
self  in  again,  and  tells  me,  "  That  if  I  would  consider  the 
tradition  of  the  church,  not  only  as  it  is  the  tradition  of  a 
company  of  fallible  men,  in  which  sense  the  authority  of  it 
(as  himself  confesses)  is  but  human  and  fallible,  &c.,  but  as 
the  tradition  of  a  company  of  men  assisted  by  Christ  and  his 
Holy  Spirit ;  in  that  sense  I  might  easily  find  it  more  than 

y  B.  ii.  §.  7.  z  B.  iii.  §.  8. 

74  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  16.  an  introduction ;  indeed,  as  much  as  would  amount  to  an 
infallible  motive.""  Well,  I  have  considered  the  tradition  of 
the  present  church  both  these  ways ;  and  I  find  that  A.  C. 
confesses  that  in  the  first  sense  the  tradition  of  the  church  is 
mere  human  authority,  and  no  more ;  and  therefore,  in  this 
sense,  it  may  serve  for  an  introduction  to  this  belief,  but  no 
more :  and  in  the  second  sense,  as  it  is  not  the  tradition  of 
a  company  of  men  only,  but  of  men  assisted  by  Christ  and 
his  Spirit;  in  this  second  sense  I  cannot  find  that  the  tradition 
of  the  present  church  is  of  divine  and  infallible  authority,  till 
A.  C.  can  prove  that  this  company  of  men  (the  Roman  pre- 
lates and  their  clergy  he  means)  are  so  fully,  so  clearly,  so 
permanently  assisted  by  Christ  and  his  Spirit,  as  may  reach 
to  infallibility,  to  a  divine  infallibility,  in  this  or  any  other 
principle  which  they  teach :  for  every  assistance  of  Christ 
and  the  blessed  Spirit  is  not  enough  to  make  the  authority 
of  any  company  of  men  divine  and  infallible,  but  such  and  so 
*N>  great  an  assistance  only  as  is  purposely  given  to  that  effect. 
Such  an  assistance  the  prophets  under  the  old  testament 
and  the  apostles  under  the  new  had;  but  neither  the  high 
priest  with  his  clergy  in  the  old,  nor  any  company  of  prelates 
or  priests  in  the  new,  since  the  apostles,  ever  had  it.  And 

A.  C.  p.  52.  therefore,  though  at  the  entreaty  of  A.  C.  I  have  considered 
this  very  well,  yet  I  cannot,  no,  not  in  this  assisted  sense, 
think  the  tradition  of  the  present  church  divine  and  infallible, 
or  "  such  company  of  men  to  be  worthy  of  divine  and  infallible 
credit,  and  sufficient  to  breed  in  us  divine  and  infallible  faith ;" 

A.  C.  p.  52.  which  I  am  sorry  A.  C.  should  affirm  so  boldly  as  he  doth. 
What !  that  company  of  men  (the  Roman  bishop  and  his 
clergy)  of  divine  and  infallible  credit,  and  sufficient  to  breed 
in  us  divine  and  infallible  faith !  Good  God !  whither  will 
these  men  go  ?  Surely  they  are  wise  in  their  generation,  but 
that  makes  them  never  a  whit  the  more  the  a  children  of  light. 
And  could  they  put  this  home  upon  the  world,  (as  they  are 
gone  far  in  it,)  what  might  they  not  effect !  How  might  they 
and  would  they  then  lord  it  over  the  faith  of  Christendom, 
contrary  to  bSt.  Peter's  rule,  (whose  successors  certainly  in 
this  they  are  not.)  But  I  pray,  if  this  company  of  men  be 

a  Luke  xvi.  8.  *>  r  Pet.  v.  3. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  75 

infallibly  assisted,  whence  is  it  that  this  very  company  have  Sect.  1 6. 
erred  so  dangerously  as  they  have,  not  only  in  some  other 
things,  but  even  in  this  particular,  by  equaling  the  tradition 
of  the  present  church  to  the  written  word  of  God  ?  which  is 
a  doctrine  unknown  to  the  c  primitive  church,  and  which  frets 
upon  the  very  foundation  itself  by  justling  with  it.  So,  belike, 
he  that  hath  but  half  an  indifferent  eye  may  see  this  assisted 
company  have  erred,  and  yet  we  must  wink  in  obedience  and 
think  them  infallible. 

XXVII. — But  A.  C.  would  have  me  consider  again,  "  That  A.  C.  p.  52. 
it  is  as  easy  to  take  the  tradition  of  the  present  church  in  the 
two  forenamed  senses,  as  the  present  scriptures  printed  and 
approved  by  men  of  this  age :  for  in  the  first  sense,  the  very 
scriptures,"  saith  he,  "  considered  as  printed  and  approved  by 
men  of  this  age,  can  be  no  more  than  of  human  credit ;  but 
in  the  second  sense,  as  printed  and  approved  by  men  assisted 
by  God's  Spirit,  for  true  copies  of  that  which  was  first  writ- 
ten, then  we  may  give  infallible  credit  to  them."  Well,  I 
have  considered  this  too;  and  I  can  take  the  printing  and 
approving  the  copies  of  holy  writ  in  these  two  senses ;  and  I 
can  and  do  make  a  difference  between  copies  printed  and 
approved  by  mere  moral  men,  and  men  assisted  by  God's 
Spirit.  And  yet  for  the  printing  only,  a  skilful  and  an  able 
moral  man  may  do  better  service  to  the  church  than  an  illi- 
terate man,  though  assisted  in  other  things  by  God's  Spirit. 
But  when  I  have  considered  all  this,  what  then?  the  scrip- 
ture, being  put  in  writing,  is  a  thing  visibly  existent ;  and  if 
any  error  be  in  the  print,  it  is  easily  corrigible  by  d  former 
copies.  Tradition  is  not  so  easily  observed,  nor  so  safely 
kept.  And,  howsoever,  to  come  home  to  that  which  A.  C.  A.  C.  p.  53. 

c  St.  Basil  goes  as  far  for  traditions  therefore  must  of  necessity  make  scrip- 

as  any ;  for  he  says,  Parem  vim  habent  ture  superior,  inasmuch  as  that  which 

ad  pietatem.  L.  de  Sp.  Sanct.  c.  27.    But  is  able  to  try  another  is  of  greater  force 

first,  he  speaks  of  apostolical  tradition,  and  superior  dignity  in  that  use  than 

not    of   the    tradition   of   the    present  the  thing  tried  by  it.     And  Stapleton 

church.    Secondly,  the  learned  take  ex-  himself  confesses,   Traditionem   recen- 

ceptions  to  this  book  of  St.  Basil,  as  tiorem  et  posteriorem,  sicut  et  particu- 

eorrupted.    Bp.  Andr.  Opusc.  cont.  Pe-  larem,  nullo  modo  cum  scriptura,  vel 

ron.  p.  9.     Thirdly,  St.  Basil  himself,  cum  traditionibus  prius  a  se  explicatis 

Serm.  de  Fide,  professes  that  he  uses  comparandam  esse.  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont. 

sometimes  agrapha,  sed  ea  solum  quae  5.  q.  5.  A.  2. 

non  sunt  aliena  a  pia  secundum  scrip-         d  Ut  §.  18.  num.  IV.;  ex  S.  August, 

turam    sententia.      So  he    makes   the  cont.  Faust,  lib.  xxxii.  c.  16. 
scripture  their  touchstone  or  trial ;  and 

76  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  infers  upon  it,  namely,  "  That  the  tradition  of  the  present 
church  may  be  accepted  in  these  two  senses :"  and  if  this  be 
all  that  he  will  infer,  (for  his  pen  here  is  troubled  and  for- 
sakes him,  whether  by  any  check  of  conscience  or  no,  I  know 
not,)  I  will,  and  you  see,  have  granted  it  already,  without 
more  ado,  with  this  caution,  that  every  company  of  men 
assisted  by  God's  Spirit  are  not  assisted  to  this  height,  to  be 
infallible  by  divine  authority. 

A.  C.  p.  53.  XXVIII. — For  all  this  A.  C.  will  needs  give  a  needless 
proof  of  the  business  ;  namely,  "  That  there  is  the  promise  of 
Christ's  and  his  Holy  Spirit's  continual  presence  and  assist- 
ance, Luke  x.  1 6.  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20.  John  xiv.  16,  not  only 
to  the  apostles,  but  to  their  successors  also,  the  lawfully  sent 
pastors  and  doctors  of  the  church  in  all  ages ;  and  that  this 
promise  is  no  less,  but  rather  more  expressly  to  them  in  their 
preaching  by  word  of  mouth,  than  in  writing,  or  reading,  or 
printing,  or  approving  of  copies  of  what  was  formerly  written 
by  the  apostles."  And  to  all  this  I  shall  briefly  say,  that 
there  is  a  promise  of  Christ's  and  the  Holy  Spirit's  continual 
presence  and  assistance.  I  do  likewise  grant  most  freely 
that  this  promise  is,  on  the  part  of  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  most  really  and  fully  performed.  But  then  this  pro- 
mise must  not  be  extended  further  than  it  was  made.  It  was 
made  of  continual  presence  and  assistance ;  that  I  grant : 
and  it  was  made  to  the  apostles  and  their  successors ;  that  I 
grant  too,  but  in  a  different  degree ;  for  it  was  of  continual 
and  infallible  assistance  to  the  apostles,  but  to  their  suc- 
cessors of  continual  and  fitting  assistance,  but  not  infallible. 
And  therefore  the  lawfully  sent  pastors  and  doctors  of  the 
church  in  all  ages  have  had  and  shall  have  continual  assist- 
ance, but,  by  A.  C.'s  leave,  not  infallible,  at  least,  not  divine 
and  infallible,  either  in  writing,  reading,  printing,  or  approv- 
ing copies.  And  I  believe  A.  C.  is  the  first  that  durst  affirm 
this:  I  thought  he  would  have  kept  the  pope's  prerogative 
entire,  that  he  only  might  have  been  infallible ;  and  not  he 
neither,  but  in  cathedra  sat  down  and  well  advised.  And 
well  advised — yes,  that  is  right:  ebut  he  may  be  sat,  and 

e  Nam  multse  sunt  decretales  hsere-  nisi  manifeste  constet,  &c.  Ja.  Almain. 

ticae,   sicut  dicit  Ocham.      Et  firmiter  in  3.  Sent.  D.  24.  q.  unica,  Conclus.  6. 

hoc   credo,  sed    non   licet  dogrnatizare  Dub.  6.  fine.     And  Alphons.  a  Castro 

oppositum,  quoniam  sunt  determinate,  both  says  and  proves,  Crclestinum  pa- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  77 

not  well  advised,  even  in  cathedra.  And  now  shall  we  have  Sect.  16. 
all  the  lawfully  sent  pastors  and  doctors  of  that  church  in  all 
ages  infallible  too  ?  Here  is  a  deal  of  infallibility  indeed,  and 
yet  error  store.  The  truth  is,  the  Jesuits  have  a  month's 
mind  to  this  infallibility ;  and  though  A.  C.  out  of  his  bounty 
is  content  to  extend  it  to  all  the  lawfully  sent  pastors  of  the 
church,  yet  to  his  own  society,  questionless,  he  means  it 
chiefly ,-  as  did  the  apologist  to  whom  Casaubon  replies,  to 
Fronto  Ducaeus.  The  words  of  the  f  apologist  are,  "  Let  day 

and  night life  and  death,  be  joined  together,  and  then 

there  will  be  some  hope  that  heresy  may  fall  upon  the  person 
of  a  Jesuit."  Yea,  marry,  this  is  something  indeed ;  now  we 
know  where  infallibility  is  to  be  found.  But,  for  my  present 
occasion,  touching  the  lawfully  sent  pastors  of  the  church,  &c. 
I  will  give  no  other  confutation  of  it  than  that  Mr.  Fisher 
and  A.  C.  (if  they  be  two  men)  are  lawfully  sent  pastors  and 
doctors  of  the  church ;  at  least,  I  am  sure  they  will  assume 
they  are;  and  yet  they  are  not  infallible,  which,  I  think, 
appears  plain  enough  in  some  of  their  errors  manifested  by 
this  discourse  and  elsewhere.  Or  if  they  do  hold  themselves 
infallible,  let  them  speak  it  out,  as  the  apologist  did. 

XXIX. — As  for  the  three  places  of  scripture  which  A.  C.  A.C.  p.  53." 
cites,  they  are  of  old  alleged,  and  well  known  in  this  contro- 
versy. The  first  is  in  St.  Luke  x.,  where  Christ  saith,  sffe 
that  heareth  you  heareth  me.  This  was  absolutely  true  in  the 
h  apostles,  who  kept  themselves  to  that  which  was  revealed 
by  Christ :  but  it  was  to  be  but  conditionally  true  in  their 
'  successors ;  He  that  heareth  you  heareth  me ;  that  is,  so  long 

pam  errasse,  non  ut  privatam  personam,  haeresin  cadere."  Isa.  Casaxibon.  Ep.  ad 

sed  ut  papam.    Adv.  Haer.  lib.  i.  c.  4.  Front.  Ducaeum.  Lond.  1611. 
And  the  Gloss  confesses,   eum   errare         &  Luke  x.  16. 

posse,  in  C.  24.  q.  i.  C.   A.  Recta  ergo.         &  Per  quod  docet  quicquid  per  sanctos 

f  Nam  in  fide  quidem  Jesuitam  er-  apostolos  dicitur  acceptandum  esse,  quia 

rare   non   posse,  atque   adeo   esse  hoc  qui    illos    audit    Christum    audit,    &c. 

unicum  T£>V  aSwaTcav,  caeteris,  quae  so-  S.  Cyrillus  apud  Thorn,  in  Catena. — Et 

lent    a    poetis    plurima    commemorari,  Dominus  dedit  apostolis   suis   potesta- 

postliac  annumerandum,   si  nescis,  mi  tern  evangelii,  per  quos  et  veritatem,  id 

Fronto,  et  puto  nescire,  docebo  te,  ab  est,  Dei  Filium,  cognovimus,  &c.     Qui- 

apologista   doctus,   hoc    ipsum    disertis  bus  et  dixit  Dominus,  Qui  vos  audit,  &c. 

verbis  affirmante.    Sic  ille  cap.  3.  ejus  Iren.  praef.  in  lib.  iii.  adv.  Haer.  fine, 
exemplaris  quod  ad  sereniss.  regem  nut         i  Dicit  ad  apostolos,  ac  per  hoc  ad 

missum,  pagina   119;   "  Jungantur  in  omnes  praepositos,  qui  apostolis  vicaria 

urium,"  ait,  "  dies  cum  nocte,  tenebrae  ordinatione  succedunt.    S.  Cyprian,  lib. 

cum  luce,  calidum  cum  frigido,  sanitas  iv.  epist.  9.     But  St.  Cyprian  doth  not 

cum  morbo,  vita  cum  morte:    et  erit  say  that  this  speech  of  our  Saviour's 

turn  spes  aliqua  posse  in  caput  Jesuitae  was  fequaliter  dictum.,  alike  and  equally 

78  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  and  so  'far  as  you  J speak  my  words,  and  not  your  own.  For 
k where  the  command  is  for  preaching,  the  restraint  is  added: 
Go  (saith  Christ)  and  teach  all  nations :  but  you  may  not 
preach  all  things  what  you  please,  but  all  things  which  I  have 
commanded  you:  the  publication  is  yours,  the  doctrine  is 
mine ;  and  where  the  doctrine  is  not  mine,  there  your  publi- 
cation is  beyond  or  short  of  your  commission.  The  second 
place  is  in  St.  Matth.  xxviii.  There  Christ  says  again,  ll  am 
with  you  alway  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  Yes,  most  cer- 
tain it  is,  present  by  his  Spirit ;  for  else  in  bodily  presence 
he  continued  not  with  his  apostles  but  during  his  abode  on 
earth.  And  this  promise  of  his  spiritual  presence  was  to 
their  successors,  else  why  to  the  end  of  the  world?  the  apostles 
did  not,  could  not,  live  so  long :  but  then  to  the  m  successors 
the  promise  goes  no  further  than  /  am  with  you  always; 
which  reaches  to  continual  assistance,  but  not  to  divine  and 
infallible.  Or  if  he  think  me  mistaken,  let  him  shew  me  any 
one  Father  of  the  church  that  extends  the  sense  of  this  place 
to  divine  and  infallible  assistance  granted  hereby  to  all  the 
apostles'*  successors.  Sure  I  am  n  St.  Gregory  thought  other- 
wise ;  for  he  says  plainly,  "  That  in  those  gifts  of  God  which 
concern  other  men's  salvation,  (of  which  preaching  of  the 
gospel  is  one,)  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  the  Holy  Ghost,  doth  not 
always  abide  in  the  preachers,"  be  they  never  so  lawfully  sent 
pastors  or  doctors  of  the  church.  And  if  the  Holy  Ghost 

spoken   and   promised  to  the  apostles  than  that  to  the  end  some  will  always 

and  the  succeeding  bishops.     And  I  be-  be  in   the  world  fit  for  Christ  by  his 

lieve  A.  C.  will  not  dare  to  say,  in  plain  Spirit   and   grace    to    inhabit,    Divina 

and  express  terms,  that  this  speech,  He  mansione  et  inhabitatione  digni.    Rab. 

that  heareth  you  heareth  me,  doth  as  in  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20.     Pergatis   ha- 

amply  belong  to  every  Roman  priest  as  bentes   Dominum    protectorern   et   du- 

to  St.  Peter  and  the  apostles :  no,  a  great  cem,  saith  St.  Cyprian,  lib.  iv.  epist.  I. 

deal  of  difference  will  become  them  well,  but   he    doth   not   say  how  far  forth. 

i  Be  ye  followers  of  me,  even  as  I  also  And,  Loquitur  fidelibus  sicut  uni  cor- 

am  of  Christ,  i  Cor.  xi.  i.  and  i  Thess.  pori.    S.  Chrysost.  Homil.  in  S.  Matth. 

i.  6.  And  if  St.  Chrysostom   enlarge   it  so 

J  And  so  Venerable  Bede  expressly,  far,  I  hope  A.  C.  will  not  extend  the 

both  for  hearing  the  word,  and  for  con-  assistance  given  or  promised  here  to  the 

temning  it.     "  For  neither  of  these,"  whole  body  of  the  faithful  to  an  infal- 

saith  he,  "belong  only  to  them  which  lible  and  divine  assistance  in  every  of 

saw  our  Saviour  in  the  flesh,  but  to  all  them,  as  well   as   in  the   pastors   and 

hodie  quoque ;  but  with  this  limitation,  doctors. 

if  they  hear  or  despise  evangelii  verba,         n  In  illis  donis  quibus  salus  aliorum 

not  the  preachers'  own."  Beda  in  Luc.  quaeritur  (qualia  sunt  prophetiae,  et  in- 

x.  15,  1 6.  terpretationes  sermormm,  &c.)  Spiritus 

k  Matt,  xxviii.  20.  Sanctus  nequaquam  semper  in  prsedica- 

1  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20.  toribus  permanet.   S.  Greg.  Moral,  lib. 

m  Rabanus  Maur.  goes  no  further  ii.  c.  29.  princ.  edit.  Basil.  1551. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  79 

doth  not  always  abide  in  the  preachers,  then  most  certainly  Sect.  1 6. 
he  doth  not  abide  in  them  to  a  divine  infallibility  always. 
The  third  place  is  in  St.  John  xiv.,  where  Christ  says,  °  The 
Comforter,  the  Holy  Ghost,  shall  abide  with  you  for  ever.  Most 
true  again ;  for  the  Holy  Ghost  did  abide  with  the  apostles 
according  to  Christ's  promise  there  made,  and  shall  abide 
with  their  successors  for  ever,  to  P comfort  and  preserve  them. 
But  here  is  no  promise  of  divine  infallibility  made  unto  them. 
And  for  that  promise  which  is  made,  and  expressly  of  infalli- 
bility, qSt.  John  xvi.  (though  not  cited  by  A.  C.),  that  is  con- 
fined to  the  apostles  only,  for  the  settling  of  them  in  all  truth. 
And  yet  not  simply  all;  for  "there  are  some  truths,"  saith 
rSt.  Augustine,  "  which  no  man's  soul  can  comprehend  in  this 
life :"  not  simply  all;  but  sall  those  truths  quce  non  poterant 
portare,  which  they  were  not  able  to  bear  when  he  conversed 
with  them :  not  simply  all;  but  all  that  was  necessary  for 
the  founding,  propagating,  establishing  and  confirming  the 
Christian  church.  But  if  any  man  take  the  boldness  to  en- 
large this  promise  in  the  fulness  of  it  beyond  the  persons  of 
the  apostles  themselves,  that  will  fall  out  which  lSt.  Augustine 
hath  in  a  manner  prophesied ;  every  heretic  will  shelter  him- 
self and  his  vanities  under  this  colour  of  infallible  verity. 

XXX. — I  told  you  a  ulittle  before  that  A.C.  his  pen  wasA.C.  p. 52. 
troubled,  and  failed  him ;  therefore  I  will  help  to  make  out 
his  inference  for  him,  that  his  cause  may  have  all  the  strength 
it  can.  And  (as  I  conceive)  this  is  that  he  would  have; 
The  tradition  of  the  present  church  is  as  able  to  work  in  us 
divine  and  infallible  faith  that  the  scripture  is  the  word  of 
God,  as  that  the  Bible  (or  books  of  scripture)  now  printed 
and  in  use  is  a  true  copy  of  that  which  was  first  written  by 

o  John  xiv.  1 6.  s  Spiritns  Sanctus,  &c.  qui  eos  doce- 

P  Iste  consolator  non  auferetur  a  vo-  ret  omnem  veritatem,  quam  tune,  cum 

bis,  sicut  subtrahitur  humanitas  mea  per  iis   loquebatur,    portare    non   poterant. 

mortem,  sed  aeternaliter  erit  vobiscum,  S.  Joh.  xvi.  12,  13.  et   S.  August,  in 

hie  per  gratiam,  in  futuro  per  gloriam.  S.  Joh.  Tract.  97.  princ. 

Lyra  in  S.  Joh.  xiv.  16.    You  see  there  t  Omnes  vel  insipientissimi  haeretici, 

the  Holy  Ghost  shall  ^e  present  by  con-  qui  se  Christianos  vocari  volunt,  auda- 

solation    and   grace,    not   by   infallible  cias  ngmentorum  suorum,  quas  maxime 

assistance.  exhorret  sensus  humanus,  hac  occasione 

CL  John  xvi.  13.  evangelicse  sententise  colorare  conentur, 

r  Omnem  veritatem :  non  arbitror  &c.  S.  August,  in  S.  Joh.  Tract.  97. 

in  hac  vita  in  cujusquam  mente  com-  circa  med. 

pleri,  &c,    S.  August,  in  S.  Joh.  Tract.  u  Num.  XXVI. 

96.  versus  fin. 

80  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  the  penmen  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  delivered  to  the  church. 
It  is  most  true  the  tradition  of  the  present  church  is  alike 
operative  and  powerful  in  and  over  both  these  works,  but 
neither  divine  nor  infallible  in  either.  But  as  it  is  the  first 
moral  inducement  to  persuade  that  scripture  is  the  word  of 
God,  so  is  it  also  the  first,  but  moral  still,  that  the  Bible 
we  now  have  is  a  true  copy  of  that  which  was  first  written. 
But  then  as  in  the  former,  so  in  this  latter  for  the  true  copy, 
the  last  resolution  of  our  faith  cannot  possibly  rest  upon  the 
naked  tradition  of  the  present  church,  but  must  by  and  with 
it  go  higher  to  other  helps  and  assurances.  Where  I  hope 
A.  C.  will  confess  we  have  greater  helps  to  discover  the  truth 
or  falsehood  of  a  copy,  than  we  have  means  to  look  into  a 
tradition.  Or  especially  to  sift  out  this  truth,  that  it  was 
a  divine  and  infallible  revelation  by  which  the  originals  of 
scripture  were  first  written ;  that  being  far  more  the  subject 
of  this  inquiry  than  the  copy,  which,  according  to  art  and 
science,  may  be  examined  by  former  preceding  copies  close 
up  to  the  very  apostles'  times. 

A.  C.  p.  53.  XXXI. — But  A.  C.  hath  not  done  yet ;  for  in  the  last  place 
he  tells  us,  "  That  tradition  and  scripture,  without  any  vicious 
circle,  do  mutually  confirm  the  authority  either  of  other." 
And  truly,  for  my  part,  I  shall  easily  grant  him  this,  so  he  will 
grant  me  this  other ;  namely,  that  though  they  do  mutually, 
yet  they  do  not  equally  confirm  the  authority  either  of  other. 
For  scripture  doth  infallibly  confirm  the  authority  of  church 
traditions  truly  so  called;  but  tradition  doth  but  morally 
and  probably  confirm  the  authority  of  the  scripture.  And 
this  is  manifest  by  A.  C.'s  own  similitude  :  "  for,"  saith  he,  "  it 
is  as  a  king's  ambassador's  word  of  mouth  and  his  king's 
letters  bear  mutual  witness  to  each  other."  Just  so,  indeed. 
For  his  king's  letters  of  credence  under  hand  and  seal  con- 
firm the  ambassador's  authority  infallibly  to  all  that  know 
seal  and  hand :  but  the  ambassador's  word  of  mouth  confirms 
his  king's  letters  but  only  probably.  For  else,  why  are  they 
called  letters  of  credence,  if  they  give  not  him  more  credit 
than  he  can  give  them  I  But  that  which  follows  I  cannot 
approve,  to  wit,  "  That  the  lawfully  sent  preachers  of  the 
gospel  are  God's  legates,  and  the  scriptures  God's  letters, 
which  he  hath  appointed  his  legates  to  deliver  and  expound." 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  81 

So  far  it  is  well,  but  here  is  the  sting:  "  That  these  letters  Sect.  16. 
do  warrant,  that  the  people  may  hear  and  give  credit  to 
these  legates  of  Christ,  as  to  Christ  the  King  himself."  Soft, 
this  is  too  high  a  great  deal.  No  v  legate  was  ever  of  so  great 
credit  as  the  king  himself.  Nor  was  any  priest,  never  so 
lawfully  sent,  ever  of  that  authority  as  Christ  himself;  no 
sure,  for  ye  call  me  Master  and  Lord :  and  ye  say  well ;  for 
so  I  am*,  saith  our  Saviour,  St.  John  xiii.  And  certainly 
this  did  not  suddenly  drop  out  of  A.  C.'s  pen.  For  he  told  us  A.  C.  p.  52. 
once  before,  "  That  this  company  of  men  which  deliver  the 
present  church's  tradition  (that  is,  the  lawfully  sent  preachers 
of  the  church)  are  assisted  by  God's  Spirit  to  have  in  them 
divine  and  infallible  authority,  and  to  be  worthy  of  divine 
and  infallible  credit,  sufficient  to  breed  in  us  divine  and 
infallible  faith/'1  Why,  but  is  it  possible  these  men  should 
go  thus  far  to  defend  an  error,  be  it  never  so  dear  unto 
them  ?  They  as  Christ !  Divine  and  infallible  authority  in 
them  !  Sufficient  to  breed  in  us  divine  and  infallible  faith ! 
I  have  often  heard  some  wise  men  say,  that  the  Jesuit  in 
the  church  of  Rome  and  the  precise  party  in  the  reformed 
churches  agree  in  many  things,  though  they  would  seem  most 
to  differ.  And  surely  this  is  one ;  for  both  of  them  differ 
extremely  about  tradition :  the  one  in  magnifying  it,  and 
exalting  it  into  divine  authority ;  the  other  vilifying  and 
depressing  it  almost  beneath  human.  And  yet  even  in  these 
different  ways  both  agree  in  this  consequent,  That  the 
sermons  and  preachings  by  word  of  mouth  of  the  lawfully 
sent  pastors  and  doctors  of  the  church  are  able  to  breed 
in  us  divine  and  infallible  faith ;  nay,  are  the  y  very  word  of 
God.  So  A.  C.  expressly.  And  no  less  than  so  have 
some  accounted  of  their  own  factious  words,  to  say  no  more, 
than  as  the  zword  of  God.  I  ever  took  sermons,  and  so  do 
still,  to  be  most  necessary  expositions  and  applications  of 

v  Will  A.  C.  maintain  that  any  legate  church  in  all  ages,  in  their  teaching  by 

a  Latere  is  of  as  great  credit  as  the  pope  word  of  mouth,  than  in  writing,"  &c. 

himself?  p.  53. 

x  John  xiii.  13.  z  For  the  freeing  of  factious  and 
y  For  this  A.  C.  says  expressly  of  silenced  ministers  is  termed  the  "  re- 
tradition,  p.  52.  And  theu  he  adds,  storing  of  God's  word  to  its  liberty," 
"  that  the  promise  for  this  was  no  less,  in  the  godly  author  of  the  late  News 
but  rather  more  expressly,  made  to  the  from  Ipswich,  p.  5 . 
lawfully  sent  pastors  and  doctors  of  the 

82  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  holy  scripture,  and  a  great  ordinary  means  of  saving  know- 
ledge. But  I  cannot  think  them  or  the  preachers  of  them 
divinely  infallible.  The  ancient  Fathers  of  the  church 
preached  far  beyond  any  of  these  of  either  faction ;  and  yet 
no  one  of  them  durst  think  himself  infallible,  much  less  that 
whatsoever  he  preached  was  the  word  of  God.  And  it  may 
be  observed  too,  that  no  men  are  more  apt  to  say  that  all 
the  Fathers  were  but  men  and  might  err,  than  they  that 
think  their  own  preachings  are  infallible. 

XXXII. — The  next  thing,  after  this  large  interpretation 
of  A.  C.,  which  I  shall  trouble  you  with,  is,  that  this  method 
and  manner  of  proving  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God, 
which  I  here  use,  is  the  same  which  the  ancient  church  ever 
held,  namely,  tradition,  ecclesiastical  authority,  first ;  and 
then  all  other  arguments,  but  especially  internal,  from  the 
scripture  itself.  This  way  the  church  went  in  St.  Augus- 
tine's timea.  He  was  no  enemy  to  church  tradition;  yet 
when  he  would  prove  that  the  author  of  the  scripture,  and 
so  of  the  whole  knowledge  of  divinity  as  it  is  supernatural, 
is  Deus  in  Christo,  God  in  Christ,  he  takes  this  as  the  all- 
sufficient  way,  and  gives  four  proofs,  all  internal  to  the  scrip- 
ture :  first,  the  miracles ;  secondly,  "  That  there  is  nothing 
carnal  in  the  doctrine ;"  thirdly,  "  That  there  hath  been 
such  performance  of  it ;"  fourthly,  "  That  by  such  a  doc- 
trine of  humility  the  whole  world  almost  hath  been  con- 
verted." And  whereas  ad  muniendam  fidem,  for  the  defending 
of  the  faith  and  keeping  it  entire,  there  are  two  things 
requisite,  scripture  and  church  tradition,  bVincentius  Liri- 
nensis  places  authority  of  scriptures  first,  and  then  tradition. 
And  since  it  is  apparent  that  tradition  is  first  in  order  of 
time,  it  must  necessarily  follow  that  scripture  is  first  in  order 
of  nature,  that  is,  the  chief  upon  which  faith  rests  and  re- 
solves itself.  And  your  own  school  confesses  this  was  the 

a  And  St.  Augustine  himself,  contra  Religione ;  in  which  book  though  these 

Faust,  lib.  xiii.  c.  5,  proves  by  an  in-  four  arguments  are  not  found  in  terms 

ternal   argument   the  fulfilling  of  the  together,  yet  they  fill  up  the  scope  of 

prophets.  Scriptura  (saith  he)  quae  fidem  the  whole  book. 

suam  rebus  ipsis  probat  quae  per  tern-         b  Duplici    modo  muniri    fidem,   &c. 

porum    successiones   haec    impleri,   &c.  Primo   diviriae   legis    authoritate,    turn 

And  Henr.  a  Gand.,  par.  i.  Sum.  A.  9.  deinde    ecclesiae     catholics    traditione. 

q.  3,  cites  St.  Augustine's  book  de  Vera  Cont.  Haer.  c.  i. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  83 

way  ever.  The  woman  of  c  Samaria  is  a  known  resemblance,  Sect.  16. 
but  allowed  by  yourselves;  "  for  dquotidie,  daily  with  them 
that  are  without,  Christ  enters  by  the  woman,  that  is,  the 
church,  and  they  believe  by  that  fame  which  she  gives,"  &c. 
But  when  they  come  to  hear  Christ  himself,  they  believe  his 
word  before  the  words  of  the  woman.  For  when  they  have 
once  found  Christ,  "  ethey  do  more  believe  his  words  in 
scripture  than  they  do  the  church  which  testifies  of  him  ; 
because  then  propter  illam,  for  the  scripture  they  believe 
the  church ;  and  if  the  church  should  speak  contrary  to  the 
scripture,  they  would  not  believe  it."  Thus  the  school  taught 
then  ;  and  thus  the  gloss  commented  then ;  and  when  men 
have  tired  themselves,  hither  they  must  come.  The  key 
that  lets  men  into  the  scriptures,  even  to  this  knowledge  of 
them,  that  they  are  the  word  of  God,  is  the  tradition  of 
the  church ;  but  when  they  are  in,  f "  they  hear  Christ 
himself  immediately  speaking  in  scripture  to  the  faithful ; 
gand  his  sheep  do  not  only  hear  but  know  his  voice."  And 
then  here  is  no  vicious  circle  indeed  of  proving  the  scripture 
by  the  church,  and  then  roundabout,  the  church  by  the 
scripture.  Only  distinguish  the  times  and  the  conditions  of 
men,  and  all  is  safe.  For  a  beginner  in  the  faith,  or  a  weak- 
ling, or  a  doubter  about  it,  begins  at  tradition,  and  proves 
scripture  by  the  church  ;  but  a  man  strong  and  grown  up 
in  the  faith,  and  under  standingly  conversant  in  the  word 
of  God,  proves  the  church  by  the  scripture :  and  then  upon 
the  matter  we  have  a  double  divine  testimony  altogether 
infallible,  to  confirm  unto  us  that  scripture  is  the  word 
of  God.  The  first  is  the  tradition  of  the  church  of  the 
apostles  themselves,  who  delivered  immediately  to  the  world 
the  word  of  Christ :  the  other,  the  scripture  itself,  but  after 
it  hath  received  this  testimony.  And  into  these  we  do  and 

c  John  iv.  fidem  tribuamus  scripturis  canonicis, 

d  Henr.  a  Grand.  Sum.  pai-.  i.  A.  10.  secundam,  sub  ista,  definitionibus  et 

q.  i.     Sic  quotidie  apud  illos  qui  foris  consuetudinibus  ecclesiae  catholic*,  post 

sunt,  intrat  Christus  per  mulierem,  i.  e.  istas  studiosis  viris  non  sub  poena  per- 

ecclesiam,  et  credunt  per  istam  famam,  fidiae,  sed  proterviae,  &c.   Walden.  Doct. 

&c.  Gloss,  in  S.  Joh.  cap.  4.  Fid.  torn.  i.  lib.  ii.  Art.  2.  c.  23. 

e  Ibid.  Plus  verbis  Christ!  in  scrip-  num.  9. 

tura  credit,  quam  ecclesiae  testificanti ;  f  In  sacra  scriptura  ipse  immediate 

quia  propter  illam  jam  credit  ecclesiae.  loquitur  fidelibus.  Ibid. 

Et  si  ipsa  quidem  contraria  scripturae  S  John  x.  4. 

diceret,  ipsi  non  crederet,  &c. — Primam 

G  2 

J.  ^ 

Sect.  16.  may  safely  resolve  our  faith.  "  hAs  for  the  tradition  of 
afterages,  in  and  about  which  miracles  and  divine  power 
were  not  so  evident,  we  believe  them  (by  Gandavo^s  full  con- 
fession) because  they  do  not  preach  other  things  than  those 
former  (the  apostles)  left  in  scriptis  certissimis,  in  most  cer- 
tain scripture.  And  it  appears  by  men  in  the  middle  ages, 
that  these  writings  were  vitiated  in  nothing,  by  the  con- 
cordant consent  in  them  of  all  succeeders  to  our  own  time." 

XXXIII. — And  now  by  this  time  it  will  be  no  hard  thing 
to  reconcile  the  Fathers,  which  seem  to  speak  differently 
in  no  few  places,  both  one  from  another,  and  the  same  from 
themselves,  touching  scripture  and  tradition  ;  and  that  as 
well  in  this  point,  to  prove  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God, 
as  for  concordant  exposition  of  scripture  in  all  things  else. 
When  therefore  the  Fathers  say,  "  JWe  have  the  scriptures 
by  tradition,"  or  the  like ;  either  they  mean  the  tradition  of 
the  apostles  themselves  delivering  it,  and  there,  when  it  is 
known  to  be  such,  we  may  resolve  our  faith  ;  or  if  they  speak 
of  the  present  church,  then  they  mean,  that  the  tradition  of 
it  is  that  by  which  we  first  receive  the  scripture,  as  by  an 
according  means  to  the  prime  tradition.  But  because  it  is 
not  simply  divine,  we  cannot  resolve  our  faith  into  it,  nor 
settle  our  faith  upon  it,  till  it  resolve  itself  into  the  prime 
tradition  of  the  apostles,  or  the  scripture,  or  both;  and 
there  we  rest  with  it.  And  you  cannot  shew  an  ordinary 
consent  of  Fathers ;  nay,  can  you  or  any  of  your  quar- 
ter shew  any  one  Father  of  the  church,  Greek  or  Latin,  that 
ever  said,  We  are  to  resolve  our  faith  that  scripture  is 
the  word  of  God  into  the  tradition  of  the  present  church? 
And  again,  when  the  Fathers  say  we  are  to  rely  upon 
scripture  konly,  they  are  never  to  be  understood  with  exclu- 
sion of  tradition,  in  what  causes  soever  it  may  be  had ;  "  }not 

h  Quod   autem  credimus  posteriori-  non  inveniuntur  in  literis  apostolorum, 

bus,  circa  quos   non  apparent  virtutes  &c.  nonnisi  ah  illis  tradita  et  commen- 

divinae,    hoc   est,    quia   non    prasdicant  data  creduntur.     S.  August.  2.  de  Bap- 

alia,  quam  quae  illi  in  scriptis  certissimis  tism.  contra  Donat.  c.  7. 
reliquerunt.     Quae  constat  per  medios         k   Non    aliunde   scientia    ccelestium. 

in  nullo  fuisse  vitiata  ex   consensione  S.  Hilar.  lib.  iv.  de  Trinit — Si  angelus 

concordi  in   eis  omnium   succedentium  de  ccelo  annunciaverit  preeterquam  quod 

usque  ad  tempora  nostra.   Hen.aGand.  in  scripturis,  &c.     S.  August,  lib.   iii. 

Sum.  p   i.  A.  9.  q.  3.  cont.  Petil.  c.  6. 

i  Scripturas  habemus  ex  traditione.         1  Quum   sit   perfectus    scripturarum 

S.  Cyril.  Hier.  Catech.  4. — Multa  quae  canon,  sibique  ad  omnia  satis  superque 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  85 

but  that  the  scripture  is  abundantly  sufficient  in  and  to  itself  Sect.  16. 
for  all  things;  but  because  it  is  deep,  and  may  be  drawn 
into  different  senses,  and  so  mistaken,  if  any  man  will  pre- 
sume  upon   his   own   strength,    and   go   single  without  the 

XXXIV. — To  gather  up  whatsoever  may  seem  scattered 
in  this  long  discourse  to  prove  that  scripture  is  the  word 
of  God,  I  shall  now  in  the  last  place  put  all  together,  that 
so  the  whole  state  of  the  question  may  the  better  appear. 

First,  then,  I  shall  desire  the  reader  to  consider  that  every  Punct.  i. 
rational  science  requires  some  principles  quite  without  its 
own  limits,  which  are  not  proved  in  that  science,  but  pre- 
supposed. Thus  rhetoric  presupposes  grammar,  and  music 
arithmetic.  Therefore  it  is  most  reasonable  that  m  theology 
should  be  allowed  to  have  some  principles  also,  which  she 
proves  not,  but  presupposes.  And  the  chiefest  of  these  is, 
That  the  scriptures  are  of  divine  authority. 

Secondly,  That  there  is  a  great  deal  of  difference  in  the  Punct.  2. 
manner  of  confirming  the  principles  of  divinity,  and  those  of 
any  other  art  or  science  whatsoever.  For  the  principles  of 
all  other  sciences  do  finally  resolve,  either  into  the  conclu- 
sions of  some  higher  science,  or  into  those  principles  which 
are  per  se  nota,  known  by  their  own  light,  and  are  the  grounds 
and  principles  of  all  science.  And  this  is  it  which  properly 
makes  them  sciences,  because  they  proceed  with  such  strength 
of  demonstration  as  forces  reason  to  yield  unto  them.  But 
the  principles  of  divinity  resolve  not  into  the  grounds  of 
natural  reason,  (for  then  there  will  be  no  room  for  faith,  but 
all  would  be  either  knowledge  or  vision,)  but  into  the  maxims 
of  divine  knowledge  supernatural.  And  of  this  we  have  just 
so  much  light  and  no  more  than  God  hath  revealed  unto 
us  in  the  scripture. 

Thirdly,  That  though  the  evidence  of  these  supernatural  Punct.  3. 
truths  which   divinity  teaches   appears   not  so  manifest  as 

sufficiat,  &c.  Vin.  Lirin.  contra  Haeres.  how   all   things  in    the  world  do  jide 

c.  2.     And  if  it  be  sibi  ad  omnia,  then  consistere.     Therefore   most  unreason- 

to  this  to   prove   itself,  at  least   after  able  to  deny  that  to  divinity  which  all 

tradition  hath  prepared  us  to  receive  it.  sciences,     nay    all    things     challenge ; 

m  Omnis  scientia  prsesnpponit  ndem  namely,  some  things  to  be  presupposed 

aliquam.     S.  Prosper,    in    Psal.   cxxiii.  and  believed, 
and  St.  Cyril,  Hierosol.  Catech.  5,  shews 

86  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  that  of  the  natural,  "yet  they  are  in  themselves  much  more 
sure  and  infallible  than  they ;  for  they  proceed  immediately 
from  God,  that  heavenly  wisdom,  which  being  the  fountain 
of  ours  must  needs  infinitely  precede  ours,  both  in  nature 
and  excellence.  He  that  teacheth  man  knowledge,  shall  not  he 
know?  °Psal.  xciv.  And  therefore,  though  we  reach  not 
the  order  of  their  deductions,  nor  can  in  this  life  come  to 
the  vision  of  them,  yet  we  yield  as  full  and  firm  assent,  not 
only  to  the  articles,  but  to  all  the  things  rightly  deduced 
from  them,  as  we  do  to  the  most  evident  principles  of  natural 
reason.  This  assent  is  called  faith;  and  faith  being  of 
things  not  seenP,  Heb.  xi.,  q would  quite  lose  its  honour,  nay 
itself,  if  it  met  with  sufficient  grounds  in  natural  reason 
whereon  to  stay  itself.  For  faith  is  a  mixed  act  of  the  will 
and  the  understanding,  and  the  rwill  inclines  the  understand- 
ing to  yield  full  approbation  to  that  whereof  it  sees  not  full 
proof:  not  but  that  there  is  most  full  proof  of  them,  but 
because  the  main  grounds  which  prove  them  are  concealed 
from  our  view,  and  folded  up  in  the  unrevealed  counsel  of 
God ;  God  in  Christ  resolving  to  bring  mankind  to  their  last 
happiness  by  faith  and  not  by  knowledge,  that  so  the  weakest 
among  men  may  have  their  way  to  blessedness  open.  And 
certain  it  is  that  many  weak  men  believe  themselves  into 
heaven,  and  many  over-knowing  Christians  lose  their  way 

n  Si  vis  credere  manifestis  invisibili-  Et  qui voluerunt, crediderunt.  S.August, 

bus,  magis  quam  visibilibus  oportet  ere-  Serai.  60.  de  Verb.  Dom.  c.  5. — Fides 

dere.  Licet  dictum  sit  admirabile,  verum  actus  est,  non  solius  intellectus,  sed 

est,  &c.  S.  Chrysostom.  Horn.  46.  ad  etiam  voluntatis,  quse  cogi  non  potest. 

Pop.  And  there  he  proves  it. — Aliae  Imo  magis  voluntatis  quam  intellectus, 

scientiae  certitudinem  habent  ex  natu-  quatemis  ilia  operationis  principium  est, 

rali  lumine  rationis  humanae,  quae  de-  et  assensum  (qui  proprie  actus  fidei  est) 

cipi  potest :  hasc  autem  ex  lumine  sola  elicit.  Nee  ab  intelleetu  voluntas, 

divinae  scientiae,  quau  decipi  non  potest.  sed  a  voluntate  intellectus  in  actu  fidei 

Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  I.  A.  5.  C.  determinatur.  Stapl.  Triplic.  cont. 

o  Psal.  xciv.  10.  Our  old  English  Whitak.  c.  6.  p.  64 Credere  enim 

translation  reads  it,  shall  not  he  punish  2  est  actus  intellectus  determinati  ad 

that  is,  shall  not  he  know  when,  and  unum  ex  iiuperio  voluntatis.  Thorn.  2. 

why,  and  how  to  punish  ?  2.  q.  4.  A.  i.  C. — Non  potest  dari  aliquis 

P  Heb.  xi.  i.  assensus  fidei,   quicunque   ille  sit,   qui 

q  Si  sit  ratio  convincens,  et  propter  non  dependet  in  suis  causis  mediate  vel 

earn  quis  credat,  alias  non  crediturus,  immediate  ab  actu  voluntatis.  Aim.  in 

tollitur  meritum  fidei.  Biel.  3.  D.  25.  3.  Sent.  D.  24.  Conclus.  6.  Dub.  4. 

q.  unic.  fine — Non  est  dicendus  ere-  And  St.  Augustine  says,  Fidei  locum  esse 

dere,  cujus  judicium  subigitur,  aut  cOr.  Tract.  52.  in  S.  Joh. ;  where  the 

cogitur,  &c.  Stapl.  Triplicat.  contra  heart  is  put  for  the  whole  soul,  which 

'Whitak.  cap.  6.  p.  64.  equally  comprehends  both  the  will  and 

r  Fides  non  fit  in  nobis  nisi  volenti-  the  understanding.  And  so  doth  Biel 

bus.  Tolet.  in  S.  Joh.  xvi.  Annot.  33.  also,  in  Sent.  D.  25.  q.  unic.  Art.  i.  F. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  87 

thither,  while  they  will  believe  no  more  than  they  can  clearly   Sect.  16. 
know.     In  which  pride  and  vanity  of  theirs  they  are  left, 
and  have  these  things  hid  from  them8. 

Fourthly,  That  the  credit  of  the  scripture,  the  book  in  Punct.  4. 
which  the  principles  of  faith  are  written,  (as  of  other  writings 
also,)  depends  not  upon  the  subservient  inducing  cause  that 
leads  us  to  the  first  knowledge  of  the  Author,  which  leader 
here  is  the  church,  but  upon  the  Author  himself,  and  the 
opinion  we  have  of  his  sufficiency,  which  here  is  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  God,  whose  penmen  the  prophets  and  apostles 
were.  And  therefore  the  mysteries  of  divinity  contained 
in  this  book — as  the  incarnation  of  our  Saviour,  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  and  the  like — cannot  finally  be  resolved 
into  the  sole  testimony  of  the  church,  who  is  but  a  subser- 
vient cause  to  lead  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Author,  but  into 
the  wisdom  and  sufficiency  of  the  Author,  who  being  omnipo- 
tent and  omniscient  must  needs  be  infallible. 

Fifthly,  That  the  assurance  we  have  of  the  penmen  of  the  Punct.  5. 
scriptures,  the  holy  prophets  and  apostles,  is  as  great  as  any 
can  be  had  of  any  human  authors  of  like  antiquity.  For 
it  is  morally  as  evident  to  any  pagan,  that  St.  Matthew  and 
St.  Paul  writ  the  Gospel  and  Epistles  which  bear  their  names, 
as  that  Cicero  or  Seneca  wrote  theirs.  But  that  the  apostles 
were  divinely  inspired  whilst  they  writ  them,  and  that  they 
are  the  very  word  of  God  expressed  by  them,  this  hath  ever 
been  a  matter  of  faith  in  the  church,  and  was  so  even  while 
the  apostles  themselves  t lived,  and  was  never  a  matter  of 
evidence  and  knowledge,  at  least  as  knowledge  is  opposed 
to  faith.  Nor  could  it  at  any  time  then  be  more  demon- 
stratively proved  than  now.  I  say,  not  scientific^,  not  de- 
monstratively. For  were  the  apostles  living,  and  should 
they  tell  us  that  they  spake  and  writ  the  very  oracles  of 
God,  yet  this  were  but  their  own  testimony  of  themselves, 

s  Matt.  xi.  25.  immediate    illuminabat,    cansahat    evi- 

t  The  apostles  indeed  they  knew,  for  dentiam.     Jac.    Almain.    in    3.    Sent, 

they  had  clear  revelation  :  they  to  whom  Dist.  24.  q.  uriica.  Conclns.  6 — But  for 

they  preached  might  believe,  but  they  the  residue  of  men  it  is  no  more  but 

could  not  know  without  the  like  reve-  as  Thomas  hath  it,  Oportet  quod  cre- 

lation.     So  St.  John  xix.  35  :  He  that  datur  authoritati  eorum,  quibns  reve- 

saw  knows  that  he  says  true,  that  you  latio  facta  est.     Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  i.  A.  8. 

which    saw    not    might   believe. — Deus  ad  8. 
in  prophetis  (et  sic  in  apostolis)  quos 

G  4 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  and  so  not  alone  able  to  enforce  belief  on  others.  And  for 
their  miracles,  though  they  were  very  great  inducements  of 
belief,  yet  were  neither  they  evident  and  convincing  proofs u 
alone  and  of  themselves ;  both  because  there  may  be  coun- 
terfeit miracles,  and  because  true  ones  are  neither  v  infallible 
nor  inseparable  marks  of  truth  in  doctrine :  not  infallible, 
for  they  may  be  marks  of  false  doctrine  in  the  highest  de- 
gree x,  Deut.  xiii. ;  not  proper  and  inseparable,  for  >all 
which  wrote  by  inspiration  did  not  confirm  their  doctrine  by 
miracles  :  for  we  do  not  find  that  David  or  Solomon,  with 
some  other  of  the  prophets,  did  any,  neither  were  any  wrought 
by  St.  John  the  Baptist,  z  St.  John  x.  So  as  credible  signs 
they  were  and  are  still  of  as  much  force  to  us  as  it  is  possible 
for  things  on  the  credit  of  relation  to  be ;  for  the  witnesses 
are  many,  and  such  as  spent  their  lives  in  making  good  the 
truth  which  they  saw :  but  that  the  workers  of  them  were 
divinely  and  infallibly  inspired  in  that  which  they  preached 
and  writ,  was  still  to  the  a hearers  a  matter  of  faith,  and 

u  Non  est  evidens  vel  ista  esse  vera 
miracula,  vel  ista  fieri  ad  illam  veri- 
tatem  comprobandam.  Jac.  Almain, 
in  3.  Sent.  D.  24.  q.  unica.  Conclus.  6. 
Therefore  the  miracles  which  Christ 
and  his  apostles  did  were  fully  suffi- 
cient to  heget  faith  to  assent,  but  not 
evidence  to  convince. 

v  Cantos  nos  fecit  sponsus,  quia  et 
miraculis  decipi  non  debemus.  S.  August. 
in  S.  Joh.  torn.  xiii.  And  he  that  says 
we  ought  not  to  be  deceived,  acknow- 
ledges that  we  may  be  deceived,  even 
by  miracles.  And  arguments  which 
can  deceive  are  not  sufficient  to  con- 
vince ;  though  they  be  sometimes  too 
full  of  efficacy  to  pervert.  And  so  plainly 
Alrnain  out  of  Ocham.  Nunquam  ac- 
quiritur  evidentia  per  medium  quod  de 
se  generat  falsum  assensum,  sicut  ve- 
ruin.  Jac  Almain.  in  3.  Sent.  D.  24. 
q.  unic.  Conclus.  6.  And  therefore  that 
learned  Roman  catholic,  who  tells  us 
"  the  apostles'  miracles  made  it  evident 
that  their  doctrine  was  true  and  divine," 
went  too  far.  Credible  they  made  it, 
but  not  evident.  And  therefore  he  is 
after  forced  to  confess,  "  that  the  soul 
sometimes  assents  not  to  the  miracles 
but  in  great  timidity;"  which  cannot 
stand  with  clear  evidence.  And  after 
again,  "  That  the  soul  may  renounce 
the  doctrine  formerly  confirmed  by 

miracles,  unless  some  inward  and  su- 
pernatural light  be  given,"  &c.  And 
neither  can  this  possibly  stand  with 
evidence.  And  therefore  Bellarmine 
goes  no  further  than  this :  Miracula  esse 
sufficientia,  et  efficacia  ad  novam  fidem 
persuadendam,  de  Notis  Eccles.  lib.  iv. 
c.  14.  §.  i,  to  induce  and  persuade, 
but  not  to  convince.  And  Thomas  will 
not  grant  so  much,  for  he  says  ex- 
pressly :  Miraculum  non  est  sufficiens 
causa  inducens  fidem.  Quia  videntium 
unum  et  idem  miraculum,  quidam  cre- 
dunt,  et  quidam  non.  Thorn.  2.  2.  q.  6. 
A.  i.  C.  And  Ambros.  Catherin.  in 
Rom.  x.  15.  is  downright  at  Nulla 
fides  est  habenda  signo.  Examinanda 
sunt,  &c.  Anastasius  Nizenus  Episco- 
pus,  apud  Baron,  ad  an.  360.  num.  21. — 
Non  sunt  necessaria  signa  verre  fidei, 
&c.  Suarez.  Defens.  Fidei  Cathol.  lib.  i. 
cap.  7.  num.  3. 

x  Deut.  xiii.  i,  2,  3.  2  Thess.  ii.  9. 
Mark  xiii.  22. 

y  Operatio  virtutum  alteri  datur^ 
i  Cor.  xii.  10.  (to  one  and  another,  he 
saith,  not  to  all,) — daemonia  fugare, 
mortuos  suscitare,  &c.  dedit  quibusdam 
discipulis  suis,  quibusdam  non  dedit ; 
(that  is,  to  do  miracles.)  S.  August. 
Serm.  22.  de  Verbis  Apost.  c.  5. 

z  John  x.  41. 

a   Here   it    may   be    observed,   how 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  89 

no  more  evident  by  the  light  of  human  reason  to  men  that  Sect.  16. 
lived  in  those  days  than  to  us  now.  For  had  that  been 
demonstrated,  or  been  clear  (as  prime  principles  are)  in  its 
own  light,  both  they  and  we  had  apprehended  all  the  mys- 
teries of  divinity  by  knowledge,  not  by  faith.  But  this  is 
most  apparent  was  not.  For  had  the  prophets  or  apostles 
been  ordered  by  God  to  make  this  demonstratively  or  intui- 
tively, by  discourse  or  vision,  appear  as  clear  to  their  auditors 
as  to  themselves  it  did,  that  whatsoever  they  taught  was 
divine  and  infallible  truth,  all  men  which  had  the  true  use 
of  reason  must  have  been  forced  to  yield  to  their  doctrine ; 
Isaiah  could  never  have  been  at  Domine  quis?  ^  Lord,  who 
hath  believed  our  report  ?  Isaiah  liii. ;  nor  Jeremy  at  Domine 
factus  sum,  cLord,  I  am  in  derision  daily,  Jer.  xx.  Nor  could 
any  of  St.  Paul's  auditors  have  mocked  at  him  (as  some  of 
them  did),  d  Acts  xvii.,  for  preaching  the  resurrection,  if  they 
had  had  as  full  a  view  as  St.  Paul  himself  had  in  the  assur- 
ance which  God  gave  of  it  in  and  by  the  resurrection  of 
Christ,  verse  31.  But  the  way  of  knowledge  was  not  that 
which  God  thought  fittest  for  man's  salvation.  For  man 
having  sinned  by  pride,  God  thought  fittest  to  humble  him 
at  the  very  root  of  the  tree  of  knowledge,  and  make  him 
deny  his  understanding  and  submit  to  faith,  or  hazard  his 
happiness.  The  credible  object  all  the  while,  that  is,  the 
mysteries  of  religion  and  the  scripture  which  contains  them, 
is  divine  and  infallible,  and  so  are  the  penmen  of  them  by 
revelation.  But  we  and  all  our  forefathers,  the  hearers  and 
readers  of  them,  have  neither  e  knowledge  nor  vision  of  the 

warily  A.  C.  carries  himself :  for  when  so  might  have  held  his  peace :  for  the 

he  hath  said,  "  That  a  clear  revelation  question   is   not,    what   clear  evidence 

was  made   to   the   apostles,"  which  is  the   apostles   had,    but   what   evidence 

most  true ;  and  so  the  apostles  knew  they  had  which  heard  them, 

that  which   they  taught  simpliciter   a  b  Isaiah  liii.  i.            c  Jer.  xx.  7. 

priori,  most  demonstratively  from  the  d  Acts  xvii.  32.     And  had  Zedekiah 

prime   Cause,    God   himself:  then    he  and  the   people   seen   it   as   clearly  as 

adds,  p.  51.  "  I  say,  dare  in  attestante :"  Jeremy  himself  did,  that  the  word  he 

that   is,   the   revelation   of   this   truth  spake  was  God's  word   and  infallible, 

was  clear  in  the  apostles  that  witnessed  Jerusalem,  for   aught   we  know,   had 

it.     But  to  make  it  knowledge  in  the  not  been  laid  desolate  by  the  Chaldeans, 

auditors,  the  same  or  like  revelation,  But  because  they  could  not  see  this  by 

and  as  clear,  must  be  made  to  them,  the  way  of  knowledge,  and  would  not 

For  they  could  have  no  other  knowing  believe  it  by  way  of  faith,  they  and 

assurance;   credible    they   might,    and  that  city  perished  together.  Jer.  xxxviii. 

had.      So   A.    C.    is   wary   there,    but  17. 

comes  not  home  to  the  business,  and  e  Nemo  pius,  nisi  qui  scripturae  credit. 

90  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  prime  principles  in  or  about  them,  but  f faith  only.  And  the 
revelation  which  was  clear  to  them  is  not  so  to  us,  nor  there- 
fore the  prime  tradition  itself  delivered  by  them. 

Punct.  6.  Sixthly,  That  hence  it  may  be  gathered,  that  the  assent 
which  we  yield  to  this  main  principle  of  divinity — that  the 
scripture  is  the  word  of  God — is  grounded  upon  no  compelling 
or  demonstrative  ratiocination,  but  relies  upon  the  strength 
of  faith  more  than  any  other  principle  whatsoever,  g  For  all 
other  necessary  points  of  divinity  may  by  undeniable  discourse 
be  inferred  out  of  scripture  itself  once  admitted;  but  this 
concerning  the  authority  of  scripture  not  possibly ;  but  must 
either  be  proved  by  revelation,  which  is  not  now  to  be  ex- 
pected, or  presupposed  and  granted  as  manifest  in  itself,  like 
the  principles  of  natural  knowledge,  which  reason  alone  will 
never  grant ;  or  by  tradition  of  the  church,  both  prime  and 
present,  with  all  other  rational  helps  preceding  or  accompany- 
ing the  internal  light  in  scripture  itself;  which  though  it  give 
light  enough  for  faith  to  believe,  yet  light  enough  it  gives  not 
to  be  a  convincing  reason  and  proof  for  knowledge.  And 
this  is  it  which  makes  the  very  entrance  into  divinity  inacces- 
sible to  those  men  who,  standing  high  in  the  opinion  of  their 
own  wisdom,  will  believe  nothing  but  that  which  is  irre- 
fragably  proved  from  rational  principles :  for  as  Christ  re- 
quires a  h  denial  of  a  man's  self,  that  he  may  be  able  to  follow 
him,  so  as  great  a  part  as'  any  of  this  denial  of  his  whole  self 
(for  so  it  must  be)  is  the  denial  of  his  understanding,  and 
the  composing  of  the  unquiet  search  of  this  grand  inquisitor 
into  the  secrets  of  him  that  made  it,  and  the  overruling  the 
doubtfulness  of  it  by  the  fervency  of  the  '  will. 

f  S.  August,  cont.  Faust,  lib.  xxvi.  Licet  enim  admirabile  sit  dictum,  verum 
c.  6.  Now  no  man  believes  the  scrip-  tamen,  et  apud  mentem  habentes  valde 
ture  that  doth  not  believe  that  it  is  the  certuvn,  vel  in  confesso.  Ex  Homil.  13. 
word  of  God.  I  say,  which  doth  not  S.  Chrysost.  in  S.  Matt.  torn.  i.  edit. 
believe,  I  do  not  say,  which  doth  not  Fronto.  Paris.  1636. 
know.  Oportet  quod  credatur  author!-  S  And  this  is  the  ground  of  that 
tati  eorum  quibus  revelatio  facta  est.  which  I  said  before,  sect.  15.  num.  i, 
Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  i.  A.  8.  ad  secundum. —  that  the  scripture  only,  and  not  any 
"On  Se  i|/v%V  ^X0M6l/»  &c-  Qllf>d  vero  unwritten  tradition,  was  the  foundatio1 . 
animam  habemus,  unde  manifestum  ?  of  our  faith,  namely,  when  the  author- 
Si  enim  visibilibus  credere  velis,  et  de  ity  of  scripture  is  first  yielded  unto. 
Deo,  et  de  angelis,  et  de  mente,  et  de  h  Luke  ix.  23. 

anima  dubitatis  :  et  sic  tibi  omnia  veri-         i  Intellectus   credentis  determinatur 

tatis  dogmata  deperibunt.     Et  certe  si  per    voluntatem,    non    per    rationem. 

manifestis credere  velis,  invisibilibus  ma-  Thorn.  2.  2.    q.   2.   A.  i.   ad   tertiurn. 

gis    quam   visibilibus    credere    oportet.  And  what  power  the  will  hath  in  case 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


Seventhly,  That  the  knowledge  of  the  Supreme  Cause  of  Sect.  16. 
all  (which  is  God)  is  most  remote,  and  the  most  difficult Punct' 7* 
thing  reason  can  have  to  do  with.  The  quod  sit,  that  there 
is  a  God,  J  blear-eyed  reason  can  see ;  but  the  kquid  sit,  what 
that  God  is,  is  infinitely  beyond  all  the  fathoms  of  reason. 
He  is  a  light  indeed,  !but  so  as  no  man's  reason  can  come  at 
for  the  brightness.  If  any  thing  therefore  be  attainable  in 
this  kind,  it  must  be  by  m  revelation ;  and  that  must  be  from 
himself :  for  none  can  reveal  but  n  he  that  comprehends,  and 
°none  doth  or  can  comprehend  God  but  himself:  and  when 
he  doth  reveal,  yet  he  is  no  further  discernible  than  P himself 
pleases.  Now  since  treason  teaches  that  the  soul  of  man  is 
immortal,  and  r  capable  of  felicity  ;  and  since  that  felicity  con- 

of  men's  believing  or  not  believing,  is 
manifest,  Jer.  xliv.;  but  this  is  spoken 
of  the  will  compared  with  the  under- 
standing only,  leaving  the  operations  of 
grace  free  over  both. 

j  Communis  enim  sententia  est  pa- 
tram  et  theologorum  aliorum,  demon- 
strari  posse  naturali  ratione  Deum  esse ; 
sed  a  posteriori  et  per  effectus.  Sic 
Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  2.  A.  2.  et  Damasc. 
Orth.  Fid.  lib.  i.  c.  3.  et  Almain.  in  3. 
Sent.  D.  24.  q.  J.  But  what  may  be 
demonstrated  by  natural  reason,  by  na- 
tural light  may  the  same  be  known. 
And  so  the  apostle  himself,  Rom.  i.  20. 
Invisibilia  Dei  a  creatura  mundi  per  ea 
quee  facto,  sunt,  intellecta  conspiciuntur. 
And  so  Calvin  most  clearly,  Instit.  lib.  i. 
c.  5.  §.  i,  Apei-ire  oculos  nequeunt,  quin 
aspicere  eum  coguntur;  though  Bellar- 
mine  would  needs  be  girding  at  him, 
De  Grat.  lib.  iv.  et  Lib.  Arbit.  cap.  2, 
Videtur  autem  et  ratio  iis  quae  apparent 
attestari :  omnes  enim  homines  de  diis 
(ut  ille  loquitur)  habent  existimationem. 
Arist.  de  Coelo,  lib.  i  t.  22. 

k  Damasc,  Orth.  Fid.  lib.  i.  c.  4. 

1  i  Tim.  vi.  1 6. — Et  ne  vestigium  sic 
accedendi  relinquit,  nisi  augeas  imagi- 
natione  cogitationis  lucem  solis  innurne- 
rabiliter  vel  quid  aliud,  &c.  S.  August. 
De  Trin.  lib.  viii.  c.  2.— Solus  modus 
accedendi  preces  sunt.  Boeth.  de  Con- 
solat.  Philos.  lib  v.  prosa  3. 

m  Praeter  scientias  philosophicas  ne- 
cesse  est,  ut  ponatur  alia  scientia  divi- 
nitus  revelata  de  iis  quae  hominis  cap- 
turn  excedunt.  Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  i.  A.  i. 

n  And  therefore  Biel  is  express,  that 
God  could  not  reveal  any  thing  that  is 
to  come,  nisi  illud  esset  a  Deo  praesci- 
tum  seu  praevisum,  (i.  e.  unless  God  did 

fully  comprehend  that  which  he  doth 
reveal.)  Biel.  in  3.  Sent.  D.  23.  q.  2. 
A.  i. 

o  Nullus  intellectus  creatus  videndo 
Deum  potest  cognoscere  omnia  quae 
Deus  facit,  vel  potest  facere  :  hoc  enim 
esset  comprehendere  ejus  virtutem,  &c. 
Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  12.  A.  8.  C. 

Ad  argumentum,  Quod  Deus  ut 
speculum  est,  et  Quod  omnia  quse  fieri 
possunt  in  eo  resplendent,  respondet 
Thorn.,  Quod  non  est  necessarium,  quod 
videns  speculum,  omnia  in  speculo  vi- 
deat,  nisi  speculum  visu  suo  compre- 
hendat.  Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  12.  A.  8.  ad  2. 
(Now  no  man  can  comprehend  this 
glass,  which  is  God  himself.) 

P  Deus  enim  est  speculum  volunta- 
rium  revelans  quae  et  quot  vult  alicui 
beato :  non  est  speculum  naturaliter 
repraesentans  omnia.  Biel.  Suppl.  in  4. 
Sent.  D.  49.  q.  3.  propos.  3. 

<1  For  if  reason  well  put  to  its  search 
did  riot  find  this  out,  how  came  Ari- 
stotle to  affirm  this  by  rational  disqui- 
sition, Ae/rerot  5e  rbv  vovv^  &c.  Re- 
stat,  ut  mens  sola  extrinsecus  accedat, 
eaque  sola  divina  sit;  nihil  enim  cum 
ejus  actione  communicat  actio  corpora- 
lis  ?  Arist.  de  Gen.  Anim.  lib.  ii.  c.  3. 
This  cannot  be  spoken  of  the  soul,  were 
it  mortal :  and  therefore  I  must  needs 
be  of  Paulus  Benius  his  opinion,  who 
says  plainly,  and  proves  it  too,  Turpiter 
affixam  a  quibusdam  Aristoteli  mortali- 
tatis  animae  opinionem.  Benius  in  Ti- 
maeum  Platonis,  Decad.  2ae.  lib.  iii. 

r  For  if  reason  did  not  dictate  this  also, 
whence  is  it  that  Aristotle  disputes  of  the 
way  and  means  of  attaining  it,  Moral. 
1.  i.  c.  9,  and  takes  on  him  to  prove  that 
felicity  is  rather  an  honourable  than  a 

92  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  sists  in  the  contemplation  of  the  highest  Cause,  which  again 
is  God  himself ;  and  since  Christ  therein  confirms  that  dictate, 
that  man^s  eternal  happiness  is  sto  know  God  and  him  whom 
he  hath  sent ;  and  since  nothing  can  put  us  into  the  way  of 
attaining  to  that  contemplation  but  some  revelation  of  him- 
self, and  of  the  way  to  himself;  I  say,  since  all  this  is  so,  it 
cannot  reasonably  be  thought  by  any  prudent  man,  that  the 
all-wise  God  should  create  man  with  a  desire  of  felicity,  and 
then  leave  him  utterly  destitute  of  all  instrumental  helps  to 
make  the  attainment  possible :  since  *  God  and  nature  do 
nothing  but  for  an  end ;  and  help  there  can  be  none  sufficient 
but  by  revelation.  And  once  grant  me  that  revelation  is 
necessary,  and  then  I  will  appeal  to  reason  itself,  and  that 
shall  prove  abundantly  one  of  these  two ; — that  either  there 
was  never  any  such  revelation  of  this  kind  from  the  world^s 
beginning  to  this  day ;  and  that  will  put  the  frustra  upon 
God  in  point  of  man's  felicity — or,  that  the  scriptures  which 
we  now  embrace  as  the  word  of  God  is  that  revelation ;  and 
that  is  it  we  Christians  labour  to  make  good  against  all 
atheism,  profaneness,  and  infidelity. 

Punct.  8.  Last  of  all ;  To  prove  that  the  book  of  God  which  we 
honour  as  his  word  is  this  necessary  revelation  of  God  and 
his  truth,  which  must  and  is  alone  able  to  lead  us  in  the  way 
to  our  eternal  blessedness,  (or  else  the  world  hath  none,) 
comes  in  a  cloud  of  witnesses ;  some  for  the  infidel,  and  some 
for  the  believer,  some  for  the  weak  in  faith,  and  some  for 
the  strong,  and  some  for  all :  for  then  first  comes  in  the 
tradition  of  the  church,  the  present  church ;  so  it  is  no  here- 
tical or  schismatical  belief:  then  the  testimony  of  former 
ages ;  so  it  is  no  new  belief :  then  the  consent  of  times ;  so 
it  is  no  divided  or  partial  belief:  then  the  harmony  of  the 
prophets,  and  them  fulfilled ;  so  it  is  not  a  "devised,  but  a 
forespoken  belief:  then  the  success  of  the  doctrine  contained 

commendable  thing?  c.  12.     And  after  modum  addiscentis  a  Deo  doctore:  Om- 

all  this  he  adds,  Deo  beata  tota  vita  est,  nis  qui  audit  a  Patre  et  didicit,  Joh. 

hominibus  autem  eatenus  quatenus  si-  vi.  45.    Thorn.  2.  2.  q.  2.  A.  3.  in  C. 
militudo  quaedarn  ejusmodi  operationis         t  Dens  et  natura  nihil  frustra  faciunt. 

ipsis  inest.    Moral,  lib.  x.  c.  8.  Arist.  de  Coelo,  lib.  i.  t.  32. —  Frustra 

s  John  xvii.  3. — Ultima  beatitudo  ho-  autem  est  quod  non  potest  habere  siium 

minis  corisistit  in  quadarn  supernatural!  usum.  Thorn,  ibid, 
visione  Dei.     Ad  hanc  autem  visionem         u  2  Pet.  i.  16. 
homo   pertingere   non  potest,   nisi   per 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  93 

in  this  book;  so  it  is  not  a  belief  stifled  in  the  cradle,  but  Sect.  16. 
it  hath  spread  through  the  world  in  despite  of  what  the  world 
could  do  against  it,  and  increased  from  weak  and  unlikely 
beginnings  to  incredible  greatness :  then  the  constancy  of 
this  truth ;  so  it  is  no  moon-belief,  for  in  the  midst  of  the 
world's  changes  it  hath  preserved  its  creed  entire  through 
many  generations :  then,  that  there  is  nothing  carnal  in  the 
doctrine;  so  it  is  a  chaste  belief;  and  all  along  it  hath 
gained,  kept,  and  exercised  more  power  upon  the  minds  of 
men,  both  learned  and  unlearned,  in  the  increase  of  virtue 
and  repression  of  vice,  than  any  moral  philosophy  or  legal 
policy  that  ever  was :  then  comes  the  inward  light  and  excel- 
lency of  the  text  itself;  and  so  it  is  no  dark  or  dazzling 
belief.  And  it  is  an  excellent  text :  for  see  the  riches  of 
natural  knowledge  which  are  stored  up  there,  as  well  as 
supernatural:  consider  how  things  quite  above  reason  con- 
sent with  things  reasonable :  weigh  it  well,  what  majesty  lies 
there  hid  under  humility  !  what  depth  there  is,  with  a  per- 
spicuity unimitable !  what  x  delight  it  works  in  the  soul  that 
is  devoutly  exercised  in  it !  how  the  ^sublimest  wits  find  in 
it  enough  to  amaze  them,  while  the  z  simplest  want  not  enough 
to  direct  them !  and  then  we  shall  not  wonder  if  (with  the 
assistance  of  a  God's  Spirit,  who  alone  works  faith  and  belief 
of  the  scriptures  and  their  divine  authority,  as  well  as  other 
articles)  we  grow  up  into  a  most  infallible  assurance,  such 
an  assurance  as  hath  made  many  lay  down  their  lives  for  this 
truth ;  such  as  that,  b  though  an  angel  from  heaven  should 
preach  unto  us  another  gospel,  we  would  not  believe  him  or  it ; 
no,  though  we  should  see  as  great  and  as  many  miracles  done 
over  again  to  dissuade  us  from  it  as  were  at  first  to  win  the 
world  to  it.  To  which  firmness  of  assent,  by  the  operation 

x  Quasi  quidam  fluvius  est,  planus,  Eccl.  Cath.  c.  17. — Sed  nihil  sub  spiri- 

et  altus,  in  quo  et  agnus  ambulet,  et  tuali  sensu  continetur  fidei  neeessarium, 

elephas  natet.    S.  Greg.  Praefat.  in  Lib.  quod   vscriptura    per    literalem    seusum 

Moralium,  c.  4.  alicubi   manifesto   non  tradat.    Thorn. 

Y  In  lege  Domini  voluntas  ejus.  Psal.  p.  t .  q.  i.  A.  10.  ad  I. 
i.  2 — Dulcior  super  mel  et  favum.  Psal.         a  Credimus,  &c.  sicut  ob  alia  multa 

xviii.  ii.  et  passim.  certiora  argumenta  (quam  est  testimo- 

z  Multa  dicuntur  submissis  et  humi  nium  ecclesiae)  turn  propter  hoc  potissi- 

repentibus    animis,   ut   accommodatius  mum,  quod  Spiritus  Sanctus  nobis  intus 

perhumanain  divina  consurgant.  Multa  has  esse  Dei  voces  persuadeat.  Whitak. 

etiam   ngurate,    ut    sttidiosa    mens,   et  Disput.    de   Sacr.    Script.    Controv.    I. 

quaesitis   exerceatur  utilius   et   uberius  q.  3.  c.  8. 
leetetur  inventis.    S.  August,  de   Mor.         b  Gal.  i.  8. 

94  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 6.  of  God's  Spirit,  the  will  confers  as  much  or  more  strength 
than  the  understanding  clearness ;  the  whole  assent  being  an 
act  of  faith,  and  not  of  knowledge.  And  therefore  the  ques- 
tion should  not  have  been  asked  of  me  by  J-.,  how  I  knew, 
but  upon  what  motives  I  did  believe  scripture  to  be  the  word 
of  God  ?  And  I  would  have  him  take  heed  lest,  hunting  too 
close  after  a  way  of  knowledge,  he  lose  the  way  of  faith,  and 
teach  other  men  to  lose  it  too. 

Punct.  9.  So  then  the  way  lies  thus  (as  far  as  it  appears  to  me) ; 
The  credit  of  scripture  to  be  divine  resolves  finally  into  that 
faith  which  we  have  touching  God  himself,  and  in  the  same 
order.  For  as  that,  so  this  hath  three  main  grounds,  to 
which  all  other  are  reducible.  The  first  is,  the  tradition  of 
the  church;  and  this  leads  us  to  a  reverend  persuasion  of  it. 
The  second  is,  the  light  of  nature ;  and  this  shews  us  how 
necessary  such  a  revealed  learning  is,  and  that  no  other  way 
it  can  be  had ;  c  nay  more,  that  all  proofs  brought  against 
any  point  of  faith  neither  are  nor  can  be  demonstrations,  but 
soluble  arguments.  The  third  is,  the  light  of  the  text  itself, 
in  conversing  wherewith  we  meet  with  the  d  Spirit  of  God 
inwardly  inclining  our  hearts,  and  sealing  the  full  assurance 
of  the  sufficiency  of  all  three  unto  us.  And  then,  and  not 
before,  we  are  certain  that  the  scripture  is  the  word  of  God, 
both  by  divine  and  by  infallible  proof:  but  our  certainty  is 
by  faith,  and  so  voluntary,  not  by  knowledge  of  such  prin- 
ciples as  in  the  light  of  nature  can  enforce  assent  whether 
we  will  or  no. 

I  have  said  thus  much  upon  this  great  occasion,  because 
this  argument  is  so  much  pressed  without  due  respect  to 
scripture.  And  I  have  proceeded  in  a  synthetical  way  to 
build  up  the  truth  for  the  benefit  of  the  church  and  the  satis- 
faction of  all  men  Christianly  disposed :  whereas,  had  I 
desired  only  to  rid  my  hand  of  these  captious  Jesuits,  (for 
certainly  this  question  was  captiously  asked,)  it  had  been 
sufficient  to  have  restored  the  question  thus;  How  do  you 
know  the  testimony  of  the  church  (by  which  you  say  you 

c  Cum  fides  infallibili  veritati  innita-  sed  solubilia  argumenta.    Thorn,  p.  i . 

tur ;  et  ideo  cum  impossibile  sit  de  vero  q.  i .  A .  8.  C. 

demonstrari  contrarium ;  sequitur  om-         d  Fidei  ultima  resolutio  est  in  Deum 

nes  probationes  quse  contra  fidem  indu-  illuminantem.    S.  August,  cont.  Fund, 

cuntur,  non  posse  esse  demonstration's,  c.  14. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  95 

know  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God)  to  be  divine  and  Sect.  16,17. 
infallible  ?    If  they  prove  it  by  scripture  (as  all  of  them  do, 
and  as  A.  C.  doth),  how  do  they  know  that  scripture  to  be  A.  c.  p.  53. 
scripture?  It  is  but  a  circular  assurance  of  theirs,  by  which num^s'16* 
they  found  the  church's  infallibility  upon  the  testimony  of  the 
scripture,  and  the  scripture's  infallibility  upon  the  testimony 
of  the  church ;  that  is,  upon  the  matter,  the  church's  infalli- 
bility upon  the  church's  infallibility.     But  I  labour  for  edifi- 
cation, not  for  destruction.     And  now,  by  what  I  have  here 
said,    I    will   weigh    my   answer,    and   his    exception    taken 
against  it. 

Jp.  The  bishop  said  that  the  books  of  scripture  are  prin- 
ciples to  be  supposed,  and  needed  not  to  be  proved. 

IK  Why,  but  did  I  say  that  this  principle — the  books  of  Sect.  17. 
scripture  are  the  word  of  God — is  to  be  supposed,  as  needing 
no  proof  at  all  to  a  natural  man,  or  to  a  man  newly  entering 
upon  the  faith  ?  yea,  or  perhaps  to  a  doubter  or  weakling  in 
the  faith?  Can  you  think  me  so  weak?  It  seems  you  do. 
But  sure  I  know  there  is  a  great  deal  of  difference  between 
ethnics,  that  deny  and  deride  the  scripture,  and  men  that 
are  born  in  the  church :  the  first  have  a  further  way  about 
to  this  principle ;  the  other  in  their  very  Christian  education 
suck  it  in,  and  are  taught,  so  soon  as  they  are  apt  to  learn 
it,  that  the  books  commonly  called  "  the  Bible,"  or  "  scrip- 
ture," are  the  word  of  God.  And  I  dealt  with  you  eas  with 
a  Christian,  though  in  error,  while  you  call  catholic.  The 
words  before  spoken  by  me  were,  "  That  the  scripture  only, 
not  any  unwritten  tradition,  was  the  foundation  of  faith." 
The  question  between  us  and  you  is,  Whether  the  scripture 
do  contain  all  necessary  things  of  faith.  Now  in  this  ques- 
tion, as  in  all  nature  and  art,  the  subject,  the  scripture,  is 
and  must  be  f  supposed.  The  quaere  between  the  Roman 
catholics  and  the  church  of  England  being  only  of  the  predi- 
cate, the  thing  uttered  of  it,  namely,  whether  it  contain  all 
fundamentals  of  faith,  all  necessaries  for  salvation  within  it. 

e  Dixi  sicut  ei  congrnebat  ad  quern  principle   among   Christians :    Quod   a 

scribebam.    S.  August.   Retract,  lib.  i.  scrip tura  evidenter   deducitur  est  evi- 

c.  13.  denter  verum,  suppositis  scripturis.  Bel- 

f  Nor  is  it  such  a  strange  thing  to  larm.  de  Eccl.  Milit.  lib.  iv.  c.  3.  §.  3. 
hear  that  scripture  is  such  a  supposed 

96  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  1 7, 1 8.  Now  since  the  question  proposed  in  very  form  of  art  proves 
not  but  s  supposes  the  subject,  I  think  I  gave  a  satisfying 
answer — that  to  you  and  me,  and  in  this  question,  scripture 
was  a  supposed  principle  and  needed  no  proof.  And  I  must 
tell  you,  that  in  this  question  of  the  scripture^s  perfect  con- 
tinent, it  is  against  all  art,  yea,  and  equity  too,  in  reasoning, 
to  call  for  a  proof  of  that  here  which  must  go  unavoidably 
supposed  in  this  question ;  and  if  any  man  will  be  so  familiar 
with  impiety  to  question  it,  it  must  be  tried  in  a  preceding 
question  and  dispute  by  itself:  yet  here  not  you  only,  but 
hBellarmine  and  others,  run  quite  out  of  the  way  to  snatch 
at  advantage. 

£.  Against  this  I  read  what  I  had  formerly  written  in  my 
reply  against  Mr.  John  White  ;  wherein  I  plainly  shewed 
that  this  answer  was  not  good,  and  that  no  other  answer 
could  be  made,  but  by  admitting  some  word  of  God 
unwritten  to  assure  us  of  this  point. 

Sect.  1 8.  23.  I. — Indeed,  here  you  read  out  of  a  book  (which  you 
called  your  own)  a  large  discourse  upon  this  argument.  But 
surely  I  so  untied  the  knot  of  the  argument,  that  I  set  you 
to  your  book  again;  for  yourself  confess  that  against  this 
you  read  what  you  had  formerly  written.  Well,  whatever 
you  read  there,  certain  it  is  you  do  a  great  deal  of  wrong  to 
'Mr.  Hooker  and  myself,  that  because  we  call  it  a  supposed 
or  presumed  principle  among  Christians,  you  should  fall  by 
and  by  into  such  a  k  metaphysical  discourse,  to  prove  that 
that  which  is  a  \prcecognitum,  foreknown  in  science,  must  be 
of  such  light  that  it  must  be  known  of  and  by  itself  alone, 

g  De  subjecto  enim  quaeritur  semper,  Neque  enim  disputari  potest,  nisi  prius 

non  subjectum  ipsum.  in  aliquo  communi   principio  cum   ad- 

h  De  Verb.  Dei,  lib.  iv.  0.4.  §.  Quarto  versariis  conveniamus.  Convenit  autem 

necesse  est.     And  the  Jesuit  here  apud  inter  nos  et  omnes  omiiino  haereticos, 

A.  C.  p.  49.  verbum  Dei  esse  regulam  fidei,  ex  qua 

i  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  8.  de    dogmatibus    judicandum    sit,    esse 

k  Whereas  Bellarmirie  says  expressly  commune  principium  ab  omnibus  con- 
that  in  the  controversies  between  you  cessum,  unde  argumenta  ducantur,  &c. 
and  us,  non  agitur  de  metaphysicis  Bellarm.  Praefat.  Operibus  praefix.  §.  ult. 
subtilitatibus,  quae  sine  periculo  igno-  And  if  it  be  "  commune  principium  ab 
rari,  et  interdum  cum  laude  oppugnari  omnibus  concessum,"  then  I  hope  it 
possunt,  &c.  Praefat.  Operibus  praefix.  must  be  taken  as  a  thing  supposed,  or 
§.  3.  as  a  praecognitum  in  this  dispute  be- 

1  His  omnibus  qusestionibus  prjemit-  tween  us. 
tenda   est   controversia  de  verbo   Dei. 

FisJier  the  Jesuit.  97 

and  that  the  scripture  cannot  be  so  known  to  be  the  word  Sect.  18. 
of  God. 

II. — I  will  not  now  enter  again  into  that  discourse,  having 
said  enough  already,  how  far  the  beam,  which  is  very  glorious 
(especially  in  some  parts  of  scripture),  gives  light  to  prove 
itself.  You  see,  neither  Hooker,  nor  I,  nor  the  church  of 
England  (for  aught  I  know),  leave  the  scripture  alone  to 
manifest  itself  by  the  light  which  it  hath  in  itself:  no;  but 
when  the  present  church  hath  prepared  and  led  the  way,  like 
a  preparing  morning  light,  to  sunshine,  then  indeed  we  settle 
for  our  direction,  yet  not  upon  the  first  opening  of  the  morn- 
ing light,  but  upon  the  sun  itself.  Nor  will  I  make  needless 
inquiry  how  far  and  in  what  manner  a  prcecognitum,  or  sup- 
posed principle  in  any  science,  may  be  proved  in  a  higher,  to 
which  that  is  subordinate,  or  accepted  for  a  prime ;  nor  how 
it  may  in  divinity,  where  prce  as  well  as  postcognita,  things 
fore  as  well  as  after-known,  are  matters,  and  under  the  man- 
ner of  faith,  and  not  of  science  strictly ;  nor  whether  a  prce- 
cognitum,  a  presupposed  principle  in  faith,  which  rests  upon 
divine  authority,  must  needs  have  as  much  and  equal  light  to 
natural  reason,  as  prime  principles  have  in  nature,  while  they 
rest  upon  reason;  nor  whether  it  may  justly  be  denied  to 
have  sufficient  light,  because  not  equal.  Your  own  school 
m grants,  "  That  in  us,  which  are  the  subjects  both  of  faith 
and  knowledge,  and  in  regard  of  the  evidence  given  in  unto 
us,  there  is  less  light,  less  evidence  in  the  principles  of  faith, 
than  in  the  principles  of  knowledge,  upon  which  there  can  be 
no  doubt.11  But  I  think  the  school  will  never  grant  that  the 
principles  of  faith  (even  this  in  question)  have  not  sufficient 
evidence.  And  you  ought  not  to  do  as  you  did,  without  any 
distinction  or  any  limitation,  deny  a  prcecognitum,  or  prime 
principle  in  the  faith,  because  it  answers  not  in  all  things  to 
the  prime  principles  in  science  in  their  light  and  evidence; 
a  thing  in  itself  directly  against  reason. 

III.— Well,  though  I  do  none  of  this,  yet  first  I  must  tell 
you  that  A.  C.  here  steps  in  again,  and  tells  me,  "  That 
though  a  prcecognitum  in  faith  need  not  be  so  clearly  known 

m  Colligitur  aperte  ex  Thorn,  p.  i.     absolute.  Bellarm.  de  Eccles.  Mil.  lib.  ir. 
q.  i.  A.  §.  ad  i. — Et  articulorum   lidei     c.  3.  §.  3. 
veritas  non   potest  nobis   esse  evidens 


98  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  18.  as  a  prcecognitum  in  science,  yet  there  must  be  this  proportion 
between  them,  that  whether  it  be  in  science  or  in  faith,  the 
prcecognitum,  or  thing  supposed  as  known,  must  be  prius 
cognitum,  first  known,  and  not  need  another  thing  pertaining 
to  that  faith  or  knowledge  to  be  known  before  it.  But  the 
scripture,"  saith  he,  "needs  tradition  to  go  before  it,  and 
introduce  the  knowledge  of  it :  therefore  the  scripture  is  not 
to  be  supposed  as  a  prcecognitum,  and  a  thing  foreknown." 
Truly  I  am  sorry  to  see  in  a  man  very  learned  such  wilful 
mistakes.  For  A.  C.  cannot  but  perceive,  by  that  which  I 
have  clearly  laid  down  "before,  that  I  intended  not  to  speak 
precisely  of  a  prcecognitum  in  this  argument :  but  when  I  said 
scriptures  were  principles  to  be  supposed,  I  did  not,  I  could 
not  intend  they  were  prius  cognitce,  known  before  tradition, 
since  I  confess  everywhere  that  tradition  introduces  the 
knowledge  of  them.  But  my  meaning  is  plain — that  the 
scriptures  are  and  must  be  principles  supposed,  before  you 
can  dispute  this  question,  °  Whether  the  scriptures  contain  in 
them  all  things  necessary  to  salvation.  Before  which  ques- 
tion it  must  necessarily  be  supposed  and  granted  on  both 
sides  that  the  scriptures  are  the  word  of  God ;  for  if  they  be 
not,  it  is  instantly  out  of  all  question  that  they  cannot  include 
all  necessaries  to  salvation.  So  it  is  a  prcecognitum,  not  to 
tradition,  (as  A.  C.  would  cunningly  put  upon  the  cause,)  but 
to  the  whole  question  of  the  scriptures'  sufficiency.  And  yet 
if  he  could  tie  me  to  a  prcecognitum  in  this  very  question,  and 
provable  in  a  superior  science,  I  think  I  shall  go  very  near 
to  prove  it  in  the  next  paragraph,  and  entreat  A.  C.  to  con- 
fess it  too. 

IV. — And  now  having  told  A.  C.  this,  I  must  secondly 
follow  him  a  little  further :  for  I  would  fain  make  it  appear, 
as  plainly  as  in  such  a  difficulty  it  can  be  made,  what  wrong 
he  doth  truth  and  himself  in  this  case.  And  it  is  the  com- 

«  Sect.  17  and  18.  num.  II.  of  faith,  if  it  contain  not  all  things  ne- 

o  And  my  immediate  words  in  the  cessary  to  salvation ;  which  the  church 

conference,  upon  which  the  Jesuit  asked  of  Rome  denying  against  all  antiquity, 

how  I  knew  scripture  to  be  scripture,  makes  it  now  become  a  question.    And 

were,  (as  the  Jesuit  himself  relates  it,  in  regard  of  this  my  answer  was,  "  That 

apud  A.  C.  p.  48,)  "  That  the  scripture  the  scriptures  are  and  must  be  princi- 

only,  not  any  unwritten  tradition,  was  pies  supposed,   and  pr&cognita,  before 

the  foundation  of  our  faith."     Now  the  the  handling  of  this  question." 
scripture  cannot  be  the  only  foundation 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


mon  fault  of  them  all:  for  when  the  protestants  answer  to  Sect.  18. 
this  argument,  (which,  as  I  have  shewed,  can  properly  have 
no  place  in  the  question  between  us  about  tradition,)  Pthey 
which  grant  this  as  a  prcecognitum,  a  thing  foreknown,  as  also 
I  do,  were  neither  ignorant  nor  forgetful,  that  things  pre- 
supposed, as  already  known  in  a  science,  are  of  two  sorts ; 
"for  either  they  are  plain  and  fully  manifest  in  their  own 
light,  or  they  are  proved  and  granted  already,  some  former 
knowledge  having  made  them  evident."  This  principle  then — 
the  scriptures  are  the  oracles  of  God — we  cannot  say  is  clear 
and  fully  manifest  to  all  men  simply  and  in  self-light,  for  the 
reasons  before  given:  yet  we  say,  after  tradition  hath  been 
our  introduction,  the  soul  that  hath  but  ordinary  grace  added 
to  reason  may  discern  light  sufficient  to  resolve  our  faith  that 
the  sun  is  there.  This  principle  then,  being  not  absolutely 
and  simply  evident  in  itself,  is  presumed  to  be  taught  us 
otherwise ;  and  if  otherwise,  then  it  must  be  taught  in  and 
by  some  superior  science  to  which  theology  is  subordinate. 
Now  men  may  be  apt  to  think,  out  of  reverence,  that  divinity 
can  have  no  science  above  it ;  but  your  own  school  teaches 
me  that  it  hath :  "  q  The  sacred  doctrine  of  divinity  in  this 
sort  is  a  science,  because  it  proceeds  out  of  principles  that 
are  known  by  the  light  of  a  superior  knowledge,  which  is  the 

P  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  l>.  iii.  §.  8. 

q  Hoc  modo  sacra  doctrina  est  scien- 
tia ;  quia  procedit  ex  principiis  notis 
lumine  superioris  scientite,  quae  scilicet 
est  scientia  Dei  et  beatorura.  Thorn, 
p.  i.  q.  i.  A.  2 — And  what  says  A.  C. 
now  to  this  of  Aquinas  ?  Is  it  not  clear 
in  him  that  this  principle — the  scrip- 
tures are  the  word  of  God,  of  divine 
and  most  infallible  credit — is  a  pr&cog- 
nitum  in  the  knowledge  of  divinity, 
and  provable  in  a  superior  science, 
namely,  the  knowledge  of  God  and  the 
blessed  in  heaven  ?  Yes,  so  clear  that 
(as  I  told  you  he  would)  A.  C.  confesses 
it,  p.  51 :  but  he  adds,  "  That  because 
no  man  ordinarily  sees  this  proof,  there- 
fore we  must  go  either  to  Christ,  who 
saw  it  clearly,  or  to  the  apostles,  to 
whom  it  was  clearly  revealed,  or  to 
them  who  by  succession  received  it  from 
the  prime  seers."  So  now,  because 
Christ  is  ascended,  and  the  apostles 
gone  into  the  number  of  the  blessed, 
and  made  in  a  higher  degree  partakers 

of  their  knowledge,  therefore  we  must 
now  only  go  unto  their  successors,  and 
borrow  light  from  the  tradition  of  the 
present  church :  for  that  we  must  do, 
and  it  is  so  far  well.  But  that  we 
must  rely  upon  this  tradition  as  divine 
and  infallible,  arid  able  to  breed  in  us 
divine  and  infallible  faith,  as  A.  C.  adds, 
p.  51,  52,  is  a  proposition  which  in  the 
times  of  the  primitive  church  would 
have  been  accounted  very  dangerous, 
as  indeed  it  is.  For  I  would  fain  know 
why  leaning  too  much  upon  tradition 
may  not  mislead  Christians  as  well  as 
it  did  tbe  Jews.  But  they,  saith  St. 
Hilary,  traditionis  favore  legis  prae- 
cepta  transgressi  sunt.  Can.  14.  in  S. 
Matt.  Yet  to  this  height  are  they  of 
Rome  now  grown,  that  the  traditions 
of  the  present  church  are  infallible,  and 
by  outfacing  the  truth  lead  many  after 
them;  and  as  it  is  Jer.  v.  31,  The  pro- 
phets prophesy  untruths,  and  the  priests 
receive  gifts;  and  my  people  delight  there- 
in: what  will  become  of  this  in  the  end? 

H  2 

100  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  18.  knowledge  of  God  'and  the  blessed  in  heaven."  In  this  supe- 
rior science,  this  principle — the  scriptures  are  the  oracles*  of 
God — is  more  than  evident  in  full  light.  This  superior  science 
delivered  this  principle  in  full  revealed  light  to  the  prophets 
and  apostles  :  rthis  infallible  light  of  this  principle  made  their 
authority  derivatively  divine.  By  the  same  divine  authority 
they  wrote  and  delivered  the  scripture  to  the  church :  there- 
fore from  them  immediately  the  church  received  the  scrip- 
ture, and  that  uncorrupt,  though  not  in  the  same  clearness 
of  light  which  they  had.  And  yet  since  no  sufficient  reason 
hath  or  can  be  given  that  in  any  substantial  thing  it  hath 
been  s  corrupted,  it  remains  firm  at  this  day,  and  that  proved 
in  the  most  supreme  science ;  and  therefore  now  to  be  sup- 
posed (at  least  by  all  Christians),  that  the  scripture  is  the 
word  of  God.  So  my  answer  is  good,  even  in  strictness,  That 
this  principle  is  to  be  supposed  in  this  dispute. 

V. — Besides,  the  Jews  never  had  nor  can  have  any  other 
proof  that  the  Old  Testament  is  the  word  of  God  than  we 
have  of  the  New ;  for  theirs  was  delivered  by  Moses  and  the 
prophets,  and  ours  was  delivered  by  the  apostles,  which  were 
prophets  too.  The  Jews  did  believe  their  scripture  by  a 
divine  authority :  for  so  the  Jews  argue  themselves ;  *  We 
Jcnow  tJmt  God  spake  with  Moses;  u  and  that  "  therefore  they 
could  no  more  err  in  following  Moses  than  they  could  in 
following  God  himself."  And  our  Saviour  seems  to  infer  as 
much  St.  John  v.,  where  he  expostulates  with  the  Jews  thus : 
*If  you  believe  not  Moses  his  writings,  how  should  you  believe 
me  ?  Now  how  did  the  Jews  know  that  God  spake  to  Moses  I 
How  !  Why  apparently  the  same  way  that  is  before  set  down. 
First,  by  tradition.  So  >'St.  Chrysostom  :  "  We  know  why: 
By  whose  witness  do  you  know  ?  By  the  testimony  of  our 

r  Non  creditnr  Deus  esse  author  hu-  lingua,  sed  multis  continetur  scriptura. 

jus  scientiae,  quia  homines  hoc  testati  Nonnullae  autem  codicum  mendositates, 

sunt  in  quantum  homines  nudo  testimo-  vel  de  antiquioribus,  vel  de  lingua  prae- 

nio  humano ;  sed  in  quantum  circa  eos  cedente  emendantur.    S.  August,  cont. 

effulsit  virtus  divina.     Et  ita  Deus  iis,  Faust,  lib.  xxxii.  c.  16. 

et  sibi  ipsi  in  eis  testimonium  perhi-  t  John  ix.  29. 

buit.    Hen.    a   Gand.  Sum.  p.  i.  q.  3.  u  Itaque  non  magis  errare  posse  eum 

A.  9.  sequentes,  quam  si  Deum  ipsum  seque- 

s  Corrumpi  non  possunt,  quia  in  ma-  rentur.    Maldon.  in  S.  Joh.  ix. 

nibus  sunt  omnium  Christianorum ;  et  x  John  v.  47. 

quisquis  hoc  primitus  ausus  esset,  mul-  y  Horn.  57.  in  S.  Joh.  9.  TJ/J.C'IS  offia- 

torum  codicum  vetustiorum   collatione  /AW  vivos  flirovros ;  ruv  Trpoy6vci)v  <pa.<rl 

confutaretur.     Maxime,  quia  non  una  r&v  ynsTepuv. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  101 

ancestors.1'  But  he  speaks  not  of  their  immediate  ancestors,  Sect.  18,19. 
but  their  prime,  which  were  prophets,  and  whose  testimony 
was  divine  ;  into  which  (namely,  their  writings)  the  Jews  did 
resolve  their  faith.  And  even  that  scripture  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  a  z  light,  and  a  shining  light  too  ;  and  there- 
fore could  not  but  be  sufficient  when  tradition  had  gone 
before.  And  yet  though  the  Jews  entered  this  way  to  their 
belief  of  the  scripture,  they  do  not  say  a  Audivimus,  We  have 
heard  that  God  spake  to  Moses,  but,  We  know  it.  So  they 
resolved  their  faith  higher,  and  into  a  more  inward  principle, 
than  an  ear  to  their  immediate  ancestors  and  their  tradition. 
And  I  would  willingly  learn  of  you,  if  you  can  shew  it  me, 
where  ever  any  one  Jew,  disputing  with  another  about  their 
law,  did  put  the  other  to  prove  that  the  Old  Testament  was 
the  word  of  God.  But  they  still  supposed  it;  and  when 
others  put  them  to  their  proof,  this  way  they  went.  And 
yet  you  say, 

Jj%  That  no  other  answer  could  be  made  but  by  admitting 
some  word  of  God  unwritten  to  assure  us  of  this  point. 

33.  I.  —  I  think  I  have  shewed  that  my  answer  is  good,  and  Sect.  19. 
that  no  other  answer  need  be  made.  If  there  were  need,  I 
make  no  question  but  another  answer  might  be  made  to 
assure  us  of  this  point,  though  we  did  not  admit  of  any  word 
of  God  unwritten  ;  I  say,  to  assure  us,  and  you  express  no 
more.  If  you  had  said,  to  assure  us  by  divine  faith,  your 
argument  had  been  the  stronger  :  but  if  you  speak  of  assur- 
ance only  in  the  general,  I  must  then  tell  you  (and  it  is  the 
great  advantage  which  the  church  of  Christ  hath  against 
infidels)  a  man  may  be  assured,  nay,  infallibly  assured,  by 
ecclesiastical  and  human  proof.  Men  that  never  saw  Rome 
may  be  sure  and  infallibly  believe  that  such  a  city  there  is, 
by  historical  and  acquired  faith:  and  if  consent  of  human 
story  can  assure  me  this,  why  should  not  consent  of  church 
story  assure  me  the  other  —  that  Christ  and  his  apostles  deli- 
vered this  body  of  scripture  as  the  oracles  of  God  ?  For  Jews, 
enemies  to  Christ,  they  bear  witness  to  the  Old  Testament  ; 

z  2  Pet.  i.  19.  ffaav,  'H/Ae?s  ^Kovffa/J.€vy  &c.  dAA.o   ori 

a    S.  Chrysost.   ubi   supra:    «:ai   ovic     oV5a/j.ev. 

102  Arclibishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  19.  and  Christians  through  almost  all  nations  bgive  in  evidence 
to  both  Old  and  New :  and  no  pagan,  or  other  enemies  of 
Christianity,  can  give  such  a  worthy  and  consenting  testi- 
mony for  any  authority  upon  which  they  rely,  or  almost  for 
any  principle  which  they  have,  as  the  scripture  hath  gained 
to  itself:  and  as  is  the  testimony  which  it  receives  above  all 
c  writings  of  all  nations,  so  here  is  assurance  in  a  great  mea- 
sure, without  any  divine  authority  in  a  word  written  or  un- 
written. A  great  assurance,  and  it  is  infallible  too ;  only 
then  we  must  distinguish  infallibility.  For,  first,  a  thing  may 
be  presented  as  an  infallible  object  of  belief,  when  it  is  true, 
and  remains  so ;  for  truth  qua  talis,  as  it  is  truth,  cannot 
deceive.  Secondly,  a  thing  is  said  to  be  infallible,  when  it  is 
not  only  true  and  remains  so  actually,  but  when  it  is  of  such 
invariable  constancy,  and  upon  such  ground,  as  that  no  degree 
of  falsehood  at  any  time,  in  any  respect,  can  fall  upon  it. 
Certain  it  is,  that  by  human  authority,  consent,  and  proof,  a 
man  may  be  assured  infallibly  that  the  scripture  is  the  word 
of  God  by  an  acquired  habit  of  faith,  cui  non  subest  falsum^ 
under  which  nor  error  nor  falsehood  is ;  but  he  cannot  be 
assured  infallibly  by  divine  faith,  dcui  subesse  non  potest  falsum, 
into  which  no  falsehood  can  come,  but  by  a  divine  testimony : 
this  testimony  is  absolute  in  scripture  itself,  delivered  by  the 
apostles  for  the  word  of  God,  and  so  sealed  to  our  souls  by 
the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  That  which  makes  way 
for  this,  as  an  e  introduction  and  outward  motive,  is  the  tra- 
dition of  the  present  church ;  but  that  neither  simply  divine, 
nor  sufficient  alone,  into  which  we  may  resolve  our  faith,  but 
only  as  is  f  before  expressed. 

II. — And  now  to  come  close  to  the  particular.  The  time 
was,  before  this  miserable  rent  in  the  church  of  Christ,  (which 
I  think  no  true  Christian  can  look  upon  but  with  a  bleeding 
heart,)  that  you  and  we  were  all  of  one  belief:  that  belief 

b  Tanta  hominum  et  temporum  con-  c  Super  omnes  omnium  gentium  lite- 

sensione  nrmatum.    S.  -August,  lib.  de  ras.  S  August,  de  Civ.  Dei,  lib.  xi.  c.  i. 

Mor.  Eccles.  Cath.  c.  29 li  libri  quo-  d  Incertum  esse  non  potest  hos  esse 

quo  modo  se  habent,  sancti  tamen  divi-  libros   canonicos.    Walden.   Doct.  Fid. 

narum  rerum  pleni  prope  totius  generis  1.  ii.  A.  2.  c.  20. 

humani    conl'essione    diffamantur,    &c.  e  Facit   ecclesiam    causam    sine  qua 

S.  August,  de  Util.  Cred.  c.  7.  et  cont.  non.    Canus,  Loc.  1.  ii.  c.  8. 

Faust,  lib.  xiii.  c.  15.  f  Sect.  16. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  103 

was  tainted,  in  tract  and  corruption  of  times,  very  deeply.  Sect.  19. 
A  division  was  made,  yet  so  that  both  parts  held  the  Creed 
and  other  common  principles  of  belief.  Of  these  this  was 
one  of  the  greatest,  sThat  the  scripture  is  the  word  of  God; 
for  our  belief  of  all  things  contained  in  it  depends  upon  it. 
Since  this  division  there  hath  been  nothing  done  by  us  to 
discredit  this  principle :  nay,  we  have  given  it  all  honour,  and 
ascribed  unto  it  more  sufficiency,  even  to  the  "  containing  of  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation,"  with  h  satis  superque,  enough  and 
more  than  enough ;  which  yourselves  have  not  done,  do  not. 
And  for  begetting  and  settling  a  belief  of  this  principle,  we 
go  the  same  way  with  you,  and  a  better  besides.  The  same 
way  with  you,  because  we  allow  the  tradition  of  the  present 
church  to  be  the  first  inducing  motive  to  embrace  this  prin- 
ciple ;  only  we  cannot  go  so  far  in  this  way  as  you,  to  make 
the  present  tradition  always  an  infallible  word  of  God  un- 
written ;  for  this  is  to  go  so  far  in  till  you  be  out  of  the  way. 
For  tradition  is  but  a  lane  in  the  church ;  it  hath  an  end 
not  only  to  receive  us  in,  but  another  after  to  let  us  out  into 
more  open  and  richer  ground.  And  we  go  a  better  way  than 
you,  because  after  we  are  moved,  and  prepared,  and  induced 
by  tradition,  we  resolve  our  faith  into  that  written  word,  and 
God  delivering  it ;  in  which  we  find  materially,  though  not 
in  terms,  the  very  tradition  that  led  us  thither.  And  so  we 
are  sure  by  divine  authority  that  we  are  in  the  way,  because 
at  the  end  we  find  the  way  proved.  And  do  what  can  be 
done,  you  can  never  settle  the  faith  of  man  about  this  great 
principle  till  you  rise  to  greater  assurance  than  the  present 
church  alone  can  give.  And  therefore  once  again  to  that 
known  place  of  St.  Augustine :  'the  words  of  the  Father  are 
nisi  commoveret,  "unless  the  authority  of  the  church  moved 
me :"  but  not  alone,  but  with  other  motives ;  else  it  were  not 
commovere,  to  move  together:  and  the  other  motives  are 
resolvers,  though  this  be  leader.  Now  since  we  go  the  same 
way  with  you  so  far  as  you  go  right,  and  a  better  way  than 
you  where  you  go  wrong,  we  need  not  admit  any  other  word 

£  Inter  omnes  pene  constat,  aut  certe  S.  August,  lib.  de  Mor.  Eccles.  Cath. 

id  quod  satis  est,  inter  me  et  illos,  cum  c.  4. 

quibns   mine  agitur,  convenit  hoc,  &c.         h  Vin.  Lirin.  cent.  Haeres.  c.  2. 
Sic    in    alia    causa    cont.    JManichaeos.         i  Contra  Epist.  Fund.  c.  5. 


104  ArMishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  19, 20.  of  God  than  we  do.  And  this  ought  to  remain  as  a  pre- 
supposed principle  among  all  Christians,  and  not  so  much 
as  come  into  this  question  about  the  sufficiency  of  scripture 
between  you  and  us.  But  you  say  that 

^.  From  this  the  lady  called  us,  and  desiring  to  hear 
whether  the  bishop  would  grant  the  Roman  church  to 
be  the  right  church,  the  13.  granted  that  it  was. 
Sect.  20.  33.  I. — One  occasion  which  moved  Tertullian  to  write  his 
book  de  Prescript,  adversus  Hcereticos,  was,  that  he  ksaw  little 
or  no  profit  come  by  disputations.  Sure  the  ground  was  the 
same  then  and  now.  It  was  not  to  deny  that  disputation 
is  an  opening  of  the  understanding,  a  sifting  "out  of  truth:  it 
was  not  to  affirm  that  any  such  disquisition  is  in  and  of  itself 
unprofitable ;  if  it  had,  St.  Stephen  !  would  not  have  disputed 
with  the  Cyrenians,  nor  St.  Paul  mwith  the  Grecians  first, 
and  then  "with  the  Jews  and  all  comers:  no  sure,  it  was 
some  abuse  in  the  disputants  that  frustrated  the  good  of  the 
disputation.  And  one  abuse  in  the  disputants  is  a  resolution 
to  hold  their  own,  though  it  be  by  unworthy  means,  and 
0 disparagement  of  truth.  And  so  I  find  it  here;  for  as  it 
is  true  that  this  question  was  asked,  so  it  is  altogether  false 
that  it  was  asked  in  this  Pform,  or  so  answered.  There  is 
a  great  deal  of  difference  (especially  as  Romanists  handle  the 
question  of  the  church)  between  the  church  and  a  church; 
and  there  is  some  between  a  true  church  and  a  right  church, 
which  is  the  word  you  use,  but  no  man  else  that  I  know; 
I  am  sure  not  I. 

II. — For  the  church  may  import  in  our  language  the  only 
true  church,  and  perhaps  (as  some  of  you  seem  to  make  it) 
the  root  and  the  ground  of  the  catholic ;  and  this  I  never 
did  grant  of  the  Roman  church,  nor  ever  mean  to  do.  But 
a  church  can  imply  no  more  than  that  it  is  a  member  of  the 
whole ;  and  this  I  never  did  nor  ever  will  deny,  if  it  fall  not 
absolutely  away  from  Christ.  That  it  is  a  true  church  I 

k  Pamel.  in   Summar.  Lib.    Videns  p  Here  A.  C.  hath  nothing  to  say, 

disputationibus  nihil  aut  parum  protici.  but  that  "  the  Jesuit  did  not  affirm  that 

1  Acts  vj.  9.  the  lady  asked  this  question  in  this  or 

m  Acts  \x-  29-  any  other  precise  form."  No  !  why,  the 

n  Acts  xix.  17.  words  preceding  are  the  Jesuit's  own; 

Debilitatur  generosa  indoles  con-  therefore  if  these  were  not  the  lady's 

jecta  in  argutias.   Sen.  Ep.  48.  words,  he  wrongs  her,  not  I  him. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  105 

granted  also,  but  not  a  right  (as  you  impose  upon  me)  :  for  Sect.  20. 
ens  and  verum,  being  and  true,  are  convertible  one  with 
another ;  and  every  thing  that  hath  a  being  is  truly  that 
being  which  it  is,  in  truth  of  substance.  But  this  word  right 
is  not  so  used,  but  is  referred  more  properly  to  perfection  in 
conditions;  and  in  this  sense  every  thing  that  hath  a  true 
and  real  being  is  not  by  and  by  right  in  the  conditions  of 
it.  A  man  that  is  most  dishonest  and  unworthy  the  name, 
a  very  thief  (if  you  will),  is  a  true  man  in  the  verity  of  his 
essence,  as  he  is  a  creature  endued  with  reason ;  for  this 
none  can  steal  from  him,  nor  he  from  himself,  but  death ;  but 
is  not  therefore  a  right,  or  an  upright  man.  And  a  church 
that  is  exceeding  corrupt,  both  in  manners  and  doctrine,  and 
so  a  dishonour  to  the  name,  is  yet  a  true  church  in  the 
verity  of  essence,  as  a  church  is  a  company  of  men  which 
profess  the  faith  of  Christ  and  are  baptized  into  his  name ; 
but  yet  it  is  not  therefore  a  right  church,  either  in  doctrine 
or  manners.  It  may  be  you  meant  cunningly  to  slip  in  this 
word  right,  that  I  might,  at  unawares,  grant  it  orthodox ; 
but  I  was  not  so  to  be  caught :  for  I  know  well  that  ortho- 
dox Christians  are  keepers  of  integrity  and  followers  of  right 
things,  (so  qSt.  Augustine,)  of  which  the  church  of  Eome 
at  this  day  is  neither.  In  this  sense  then  no  right,  that  is, 
no  orthodox  church  at  Rome. 

III. — And  yet  no  news  it  is  that  I  granted  the  Roman  church 
to  be  a  true  church;  for  so  much  very  learned  protestants 
rhave  acknowledged  before  me,  and  the  truth  cannot  deny 
it.  For  that  church  which  receives  the  scripture  as  a  rule 
of  faith,  though  but  as  a  partial  and  imperfect  rule,  and  both 
the  sacraments  as  instrumental  causes  and  seals  of  grace, 
though  they  add  more  and  misuse  these,  yet  cannot  but  be 
a  true  church  in  essence.  How  it  is  in  manners  and  doc- 
trine, I  would  you  would  look  to  it  with  a  single  eye  :  ;;  sfor 

q  Integritatis  custodes,  et  recta  sec-  grant  it.     Fr.  Johnson,  in  his  Treatise 

tantes.     De  vera  Relig.  c.  5.  called  A  Christian  Plea,  printed  1617, 

r  Hooker's  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  I. —  p.  123,  &c. 

Jimius  L.  de  Eccl.  c.   17.     Fallnntur         s  Si    tamen    bono   ingenio  pietas  et 

qui  ecclesiam  negant,  quia  papatus  in  pax  quaedam  mentis  accedat,  sine  qua 

ea  est. — Reynold.  Thes.  5.     Negat  tan-  de  sanctis  rebus  nihil  prorsus  intelligi 

turn   esse   catholicam,  vel   sanum  ejus  potest.     S.  August,  de  Util.  Cred.  c.  1 8. 
membrum — Nay,    the  very  separatists 

106  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  20.   if  piety  and  a  peaceable  mind  be  not  joined  to  a  good  under- 
standing, nothing  can  be  known  in  these  great  things." 

A.  C.  p.  53.  IV. — Here  A.  C.  tells  us,  "  That  the  Jesuit  doth  not  say 
that  the  lady  asked  this  question  in  this  or  any  other  precise 
form  of  words ;  but  saith,  the  Jesuit  is  sure  her  desire  was 
to  know  of  me  whether  I  would  grant  the  Roman  church  to 
be  the  right  church."  And  how  was  the  Jesuit  sure  the 

A.  C.  p.  54  lady  desired  to  hear  this  from  me  ?  Why,  A.  C.  tells  us 
that  too ;  for  he  adds,  "  That  the  Jesuit  had  particularly 
spoken  with  her  before,  and  wished  her  to  insist  upon  that 
point."  Where  you  may  see,  and  it  is  fit  the  clergy  of 
England  should  consider  with  what  cunning  adversaries  they 
have  to  deal,  who  can  find  a  way  to  *  prepare  their  disciples, 
and  instruct  them  beforehand  upon  what  points  to  insist, 
that  so  they  may  with  more  ease  slide  that  into  their  hearts 
and  consciences  which  should  never  come  there.  And  this 
once  known  I  hope  they  will  the  better  provide  against  it. 

A.  C.  p.  54.  But  A.  C.  goes  on  and  tells  us,  "  That  certainly,  by  my 
answer,  the  lady's  desire  must  needs  be  to  hear  from  me, 
not  whether  the  church  of  Borne  were  a  right  church,  See., 
but  whether  I  would  grant  that  there  is  but  one  holy  catholic 
church,  and  whether  the  Roman  church  (that  is,  not  only 
that  which  is  in  the  city  or  diocess  of  Rome,  but  all  that 
agreed  with  it)  be  not  it."  About  a  church  and  the  church 
I  have  said  enough  u  before,  and  shall  not  repeat.  Nor  is 
there  any  need  I  should.  For  A.  C.  would  have  it  the 
church,  the  one  holy  catholic  church.  But  this  cannot  be 
granted,  take  the  Roman  church  in  what  sense  they  please, 
in  city  or  diocess,  or  all  that  agree  with  it.  Yet  howsoever, 
before  I  leave  this,  I  must  acquaint  the  reader  with  a  perfect 
Jesuitism.  In  all  the  primitive  times  of  the  church,  a  man, 
or  a  family,  or  a  national  church,  were  accounted  right  and 
orthodox  as  they  agreed  with  the  catholic  church ;  but  the 
catholic  was  never  then  measured  or  judged  by  man,  family, 
or  nation.  But  now  in  the  Jesuits'  new  school,  the  one  holy 

t  And  after  A.  C.  saith  again,  p.  54,  too,  that  whatever  we  say  (unless  we 

"  That  the  lady  did  not  ask  the  ques-  grant  what  they  would  have)  their  pros- 

tion   as   if  she   meant  to   he   satisfied  elytes  shall  not  he  satisfied  with  it. 

with  hearing  what  I  said."     So  belike  "u  Sect.  20.  num.  I. 
they  take  caution  beforehand  for  that 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  107 

x  catholic  church  must  be  measured  by  that  which  is  in  the  Sect.  20. 
city  or  diocess  of  Rome,  or  of  them  which  agreed  with  it, 
and  not  Rome  by  the  catholic.  For  so  A.  C.  says  expressly : 
"  The  lady  would  know  of  me,  not  whether  that  were  the 
catholic  church  to  which  Rome  agreed,  but  whether  that 
were  not  the  holy  catholic  church  which  agreed  with  Rome." 
So  upon  the  matter,  belike  the  Christian  faith  was  committed 
to  the  custody  of  the  Roman,  not  of  the  catholic  church  ;  and 
a  man  cannot  agree  with  the  catholic  church  of  Christ  (in 
this  new  doctrine  of  A.  C.)  unless  he  agree  with  the  church 
of  Rome  :  but  if  he  agree  with  that,  all  is  safe,  and  he  is  as 
orthodox  as  he  need  be. 

V. — But  A.  C.  is  yet  troubled  about  the  form  of  the  lady's 
question.  And  he  will  not  have  it  "  that  she  desired  to 
know  whether  I  would  grant  the  Roman  church  to  be  the 
right  church  ;"  though  these  be  her  words  according  to  the 
Jesuit's  own  setting  down ;  but  he  thinks  the  question  was, 
"  Whether  the  church  of  Rome  was  not  the  right  church  :"  A.  C.  p.  54. 
not  "  be  not,"  but  "  was  not."  Was  not,  that  is,  "  was  not 
once,  or  in  time  past,  the  right  church,  before  Luther  and 
others  made  a  breach  from  it."  Why  truly  A.  C.  needed 
not  have  troubled  himself  half  so  much  about  this.  For  let 
him  take  his  choice.  It  shall  be  all  one  to  me,  whether  the 
question  were  asked  by  be  or  by  ivas ;  for  the  church  of 
Rome  neither  is  nor  was  the  right  church,  as  the  lady  de- 
sired to  hear.  A  particular  church  it  is  and  was,  and  in 
some  times  right,  and  in  some  times  wrong ;  and  then  in 
some  things  right,  and  in  some  things  wrong :  but  the  right 
church,  or  the  holy  catholic  church,  it  never  was,  nor  ever 
can  be ;  and  therefore  was  not  such  before  Luther  and 
others  either  left  it  or  were  thrust  from  it.  A  particular 
church  it  was :  but  then  A.  C.  is  not  distinct  enough  here 

x  And  though  Stapleton,  to  magnify  employed    his    legates,    Caldonius    and 

the  church  of  Rome,  is  pleased  to  say,  Fortunatus,  not  to  bring  the  catholic 

Apud    veteres   pro    eodem   habita   fuit  church  to  the  communion  of  Rome,  but 

ecclesia  Romana  et  ecclesia  catholica ;  Rome  to  the  catholic  church  :  EJabora- 

yet  he  is  so  modest  as  to  give  this  rea-  rent,  ut  ad  catholic*  ecclesiae  unitatem 

son  of  it ;  Quia   ejus   communio  erat  scissi  corporis  membra  componerent,  &c. 

evidenter  et  certissime  cum  tota  catho-  Now  the  members  of  this  rent  and  torn 

lica.    Relect.  Cont.  i.  q.  5.  A.  3.    (Lo,  body  were  they  of  Rome,  then  in  an 

the  communion  of  the  Roman  was  then  open    schism    between    Cornelius    and 

with  the  catholic  church ;  not  of  the  Novatian.     S.  Cyprian,  lib.  ii.  epist.  10. 
catholic   with    it !)     And    St.  Cyprian 

108  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect/2o.  neither;  for  the  church  of  Borne  both  was  and  was  not  a 
right  or  orthodox  church  before  Luther  made  a  breach  from 
it.  For  the  word  ante,  before,  may  look  upon  Eome  and 
that  church  a  great  way  off,  or  long  before ;  and  then  in  the 
prime  times  of  it  it  was  a  most  right  and  orthodox  church : 
but  it  may  look  also  nearer  home,  and  upon  the  immediate 
times  before  Luther,  or  some  ages  before  that ;  and  then  in 
those  times  yRome  was  a  corrupt  and  a  tainted  church,  far 
from  being  right;  and  yet  both  these  times  were  before 
Luther  made  his  breach.  So  here  A.  C.  should  have  been 
more  distinct.  For  the  word  before  includes  the  whole  time 
before  Luther ;  in  part  of  which  time  that  church  of  Eome 
was  right,  and  in  other  part  whereof  it  was  wrong.  But 
2  A.  C.  adds  yet,  "  That  I  suspected  the  lady  would  infer,  if 
once  that  church  were  right,  what  hindered  it  now  to  be, 
since  that  did  not  depart  from  the  protestant  church,  but 
the  protestant  church  from  it  f  Truly,  I  neither  suspected 
the  inference  would  be  made,  nor  fear  it  when  it  is  made ;  for 
it  is  no  news  that  any  particular  church,  Roman  as  well  as 
another,  may  once  have  been  right  and  afterwards  wrong, 
and  in  far  worse  case :  and  so  it  was  in  Rome  after  the 
a enemy  had  sowed  tares  among  the  wheat.  But  whether  these 
tares  were  sown  while  their  bishops  slept,  or  whether  bthey 

y   Cum    infiniti     abusus,    schismata  in  that  church  should  speak  thus,  if  he 

quoque    et    haereses    per    totum    nuric  did  not  see  some  errors  in  the  doctrine 

Christianum  orbem  invalescant,  eccle-  of  that  church  as  well  as  in  manners, 

siam  Dei  legitima  indigere  reformatione  Nay,  Cassander,  though  he  lived   and 

nemini    non    apertum    erit.     Pet.    de  died  in  the  communion  of  the  church 

Aliaco  Card.  Cameracensis   L.  de  Re-  of  Rome,  yet  found  fault  with  some  of 

form.  Ecclesiae.     And   if  schisms  and  her   doctrines.     Consult.    Artie.    21    et 

heresies    did    then    invade    the   whole  22.     And    Pope  Julius  III.  professed 

Christian  world,  let  A.  C.  consider  how  at  Bononia,  In  sacramentorum  ecclesiae 

Rome  escaped  free.     And  I  think  Ca-  ministerium   innumerabiles   abusus   ir- 

meracensis  was  in  this  prophetical ;  for  repsisse.     Espencaeus  in   Tit.   i .     And 

sixty   years   and   more   before    Luther  yet  he  was  one  of  the  bishops,  nay,  the 

was  born,  and  so  before  the  great  trou-  chief  legate  in  the  council  of  Trent, 
bles  which  have  since  fallen  upon  all         z  A.  C.  p.  54. 
Christendom,  he  used   these  words  in         a  Matth.  xfii.  25. 
the  book  which  himself  delivered   np         b  For  A.  C.  knows  well  what  strange 

in  the  council  of  Constance :  Nisi  cele-  doctrines  are  charged  upon  some  popes : 

riter  fiat  reformatio,  audeo  dicere  quod  and    all    Bellarmine's    labour,    though 

licet  magna  sint,  quae  videmus,  tamen  great  and   full  of  art,  is  not   able  to 

in  brevi  incomparabiliter  majora  vide-  wash  them  clean.     Bellarm.  lib.  iv.  de 

bimus.     Et  post  ista  tonitrua  tarn  hoi--  Rom.  Pont.  c.  8,  &c.     Et  papas  quos- 

renda,  majora  alia  audiemus,&c.  Camer.  dam  graves  errores  seminasse  in  ecclesia 

L.  de  Reform.  Eccles.  And  it  will  hardly  Christi  luce  clarius  est.     Et  probatur  a 

sink  into  any  man's  judgment,  that  so  Jacob.  Almain.  Opusc.  de  Author.  Ec- 

great  a  man  as  Petrus  de  Aliaco  was  clesiee,  c.   10.     Arid  Cassander  speaks 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  109 

themselves  did  not  help  to  sow  them,  is  too  large  a  disquisi-Sect.2o,si. 
tion  for  this  place.  So  though  it  were  once  right,  yet  the 
tares  which  grow  thick  in  it  are  the  cause  why  it  is  not  so 
now.  And  then,  though  that  church  did  not  depart  from 
the  protestants'  church,  yet  if  it  gave  great  and  just  cause 
for  the  protestant  church  to  depart  from  the  errors  of  it, 
while  it  in  some  particulars  departed  from  the  truth  of 
Christ,  it  comes  all  to  one  for  this  particular,  That  the 
Roman  church,  which  was  once  right,  is  now  become  wrong, 
by  embracing  superstition  and  error. 

dp.  Further  he  confessed,  "  that  protestants  had  made  a 
rent  and  division  from  it." 

23.  I. — I  confess  I  could  here  be  heartily  c angry,  but  that  Sect.  21. 
I  have  resolved  in  handling  matters  of  religion  to  leave  all 
gall  out  of  my  ink ;  for  I  never  granted  that  the  Roman 
church  either  is  or  was  the  right  church.  It  is  too  true 
indeed  that  there  is  a  miserable  rent  in  the  church,  and 
I  make  no  question  but  the  best  men  do  most  bemoan  itd; 
nor  is  he  a  Christian  that  would  not  have  unity,  might  he 
have  it  with  truth.  But  I  never  said  nor  thought  that  the 
protestants  made  this  rent.  The  cause  of  the  schism  is 
yours  ;  for  you  thrust  us  from  you,  because  we  called  for 
truth  and  redress  of  abuses.  For  a  e  schism  must  needs  be 
theirs  whose  the  cause  of  it  is.  The  woe  runs  full  out  of 
the  mouth  of  f  Christ  ever  against  him  that  gives  the  offence, 
not  against  him  that  takes  it  ever.  But  you  have  by  this 

it   out   more   plainly :  Utinam  illi  (he  the  Ariaris,   and  I  shall   not   compare 

speaks  of  the  bishops  and  rectors  in  the  you  with  them,  nor  give  any  offence 

Roman  church)  a  quibus  hsec  informa-  that  way.     I  shall  only  draw  the  gene- 

tio   accipienda   esset,    non    ipsi    harum  ral   argument   from    it,    thus :    If  the 

superstitionum  auctores  essent :  vel  certe  orthodox    did  well   in   departing   from 

eas  in  animis  hominum  simplicium  ali-  the  Arians,  then  the  schism  was  to  be 

quando  questus  causa  nutrirent.     Cas-  imputed  to   the  Ariaus,   although  the 

sand.  Consult.  Art.  i  \ .  versus  finem.  orthodox  did  depart  from  them.    Other- 

c  Grave  omnino  crimen,  sed  defen-  wise,  if  the  orthodox  had  been  guilty 

sionem  longinquam  non  requirit,  satis  of  the  schism.,  he  could  not  have  said, 

est  enim  negare ;  sicut  pro  ecclesia  olim.  Recte  scias  nos  fecisse  recedendo.     For 

S.  August,  de  Util.  Cred.  c.  5.  it  cannot  be  that  a  man  should  do  well 

d  Hanc  quae  respectu  hominum  eccle-  in  making   a  schism.     There  may  be 

sia  dicitur,  observare,  ejusque  commu-  therefore  a  necessary  separation,  which 

nionem  colere  debemus.     Calv.  Inst.  4.  yet  incurs  not  the  '  blame  of  schism ; 

c.  i.  §.  7.  and  that  is,  when  doctrines  are  taught 

e  Recte  scias  nos   fecisse   recedendo  contrary  to  the  catholic  faith, 
a  vobis,  &c.     Lucif.  lib.  de  non  con-         f  Matth.  xviii.  7. 
veniendo  cum  Haereticis.    He  speaks  of 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  21.  carriage  given  me  just  cause  never  to  treat  with  you  or  your 
like  but  before  a  judge  or  a  jury. 

A.C.p.  55,  II. — But  here  A.  C.  tells  me,  "I  had  no  cause  to  be 
angry,  either  with  the  Jesuit  or  myself.  Not  with  the  Jesuit, 
for  he  writ  down  my  words  in  fresh  memory,  and  upon 
special  notice  taken  of  the  passage ;  and  that  I  did  say 
either  iisdem  or  cequipollentibus  verbis,  either  in  these  or  equiva- 
lent words,  that  the  protestants  did  make  the  rent  or  division 
from  the  Roman  church."  What !  did  the  Jesuit  set  down 
my  words  in  fresh  memory,  and  upon  special  notice  taken  ? 
and  were  they  so  few  as  these,  "  the  protestants  did  make  the 
schism,"  and  yet  was  his  memory  so  short  that  he  cannot 
tell  whether  I  uttered  this  iisdem  or  cequipollentibus  verbis? 
Well,  I  would  A.  C.  and  his  fellows  would  leave  this  art  of 
theirs,  and  in  conferences  (which  sthey  are  so  ready  to  call 
for)  impose  no  more  upon  other  men  than  they  utter.  And 
you  may  observe  too,  that  after  all  this  full  assertion  that 
I  spake  this  iisdem  or  cequipollentibus  verbis,  A.  C.  concludes 

A. C. p.  55. thus:  "  The  Jesuit  took  special  notice  in  fresh  memory,  and 
is  sure  he  related,  at  least  in  sense,  just  as  it  was  uttered." 
What  is  this,  "  at  least  in  sense,  just  as  it  was  uttered  T 
Do  not  these  two  interfere,  and  shew  the  Jesuit  to  be  upon 
his  shuffling  pace  ?  For  if  it  were  just  as  it  was  uttered, 
then  it  was  in  the  very  form  of  words  too,  not  in  sense  only ; 
and  if  it  were  but  at  least  in  sense,  then,  when  A.  C.  hath 
made  the  most  of  it,  it  was  not  just  as  it  was  uttered.  Be- 
sides, "  at  least  in  sense"  doth  not  tell  us  in  whose  sense  it  was  : 
for  if  A.  C.  mean  the  Jesuit's  sense  of  it,  he  may  make 
what  sense  he  pleases  of  his  own  words  ;  but  he  must  impose 
no  sense  of  his  upon  my  words  :  but  as  he  must  leave  my 
words  to  myself,  so  when  my  words  are  uttered  or  written, 
he  must  leave  their  sense  either  to  me,  or  to  that  genuine 
construction  which  an  ingenuous  reader  can  make  of  them. 
And  what  my  words  of  grant  were  I  have  before  expressed, 
and  their  sense  too. 

A.C.p. 56.  III.— Not  with  myself:  that  is  the  next.  For  A.  C.  says, 
:c  It  is  truth,  and  that  the  world  knows  it,  that  the  protestants 
did  depart  from  the  church  of  Rome,  and  got  the  name  of 

KA.  c.  P.  S7. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  Ill 

protestants  by  protesting  against  it."  No,  A.  C.,  by  your  Sect.  21. 
leave,  this  is  not  truth  neither ;  and  therefore  I  had  reason 
to  be  angry  with  myself  had  I  granted  it.  For,  first,  the 
protestants  did  not  depart :  for  departure  is  voluntary ;  so 
was  not  theirs.  I  say,  not  theirs,  taking  their  whole  body 
and  cause  together ;  for  that  some  among  them  were  peevish, 
and  some  ignorantly  zealous,  is  neither  to  be  doubted,  nor 
is  there  danger  in  confessing  it.  Your  body  is  not  so  perfect 
(I  wot  well)  but  that  many  amongst  you  are  as  pettish  and 
as  ignorantly  zealous  as  any  of  ours.  You  must  not  suffer 
for  these,  nor  we  for  those,  nor  should  the  church  of  Christ 
for  either.  Next,  the  protestants  did  not  get  that  name  by 
protesting  against  the  church  of  Rome,  but  by  protesting 
(and  that  when  nothing  else  would  serve)  h  against  her 
errors  and  superstitions.  Do  you  but  remove  them  from  the 
church  of  Rome,  and  our  protestation  is  ended,  and  the 
separation  too.  Nor  is  protestation  itself  such  an  unheard  of 
thing  in  the  very  heart  of  religion ;  for  the  sacraments,  both 
of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  are  called  by  your  own 
school,  visible  signs  protesting  the  faith.  Now  if  the  sacra- 
ments be  protestantia,  signs  protesting,  why  may  not  men 
also,  and  without  all  offence,  be  called  protestants ;  since, 
by  receiving  the  true  sacraments  and  by  refusing  them  which 
are  corrupted,  they  do  but  protest  the  sincerity  of  their  faith 
against  that  doctrinal  corruption  which  hath  invaded  the 
great  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  and  other  parts  of  religion  ? 
especially  since  they  are  men  'which  must  protest  their  faith 
by  these  visible  signs  and  sacraments. 

IV. — But  A.  C.  goes  on,  and  will  needs  have  it,  that  the  A.  C.  p.  56. 
protestants  were  the  cause  of  the  schism.     "  For,"  saith  he, 
"  though  the  church  of  Rome  did  thrust  them  from  her  by 
excommunication,  yet  they  had  first  divided  themselves  by 
obstinate    holding    and   teaching   opinions    contrary   to   the 

h   Conventus    fuit   ordinum   imperii  r.omen.  Vide  Calvis.  Chro.  ab  an.  1529. 

Spirae.      Ibi   decretum   factum   est,  ut  This    protestation    therefore    was    not 

edictum  Wormatiense  observaretur  con-  simply  against  the  Roman  church,  but 

tra  novatores  (sic  appellare  placuit)  et  against  the   edict,  which  was   for  the 

ut  omnia  in  integrum  restituantur,  (et  restoring  of  all  things  to  their  former 

sic  nulla  omnino  reformatio.)     Contra  estate  without  any  reformation, 
hoc  edictum   solennis    fuit   protestatio,         i  Quibus  homo  fidem  suam  protesta- 

Aprilis  16.  an.  Christi  1529.     Et  hinc  retur.     Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  61.  A.  3.  4.  C. 
ortum  pervulgatum  illud  protestantium 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect. 21,  Roman  faith  and  practice  of  the  church;  which  to  do  St. 
Bernard  thinks  is  pride,  and  St.  Augustine,  madness."  So 
then,  in  his  opinion,  first,  excommunication  on  their  part 
was  not  the  prime  cause  of  this  division,  but  the  holding 
and  teaching  of  contrary  opinions.  Why,  but  then,  in  iny 
opinion,  that  holding  and  teaching  was  not  the  prime  cause 
neither;  but  the  corruptions  and  superstitions  of  Rome, 
which  forced  many  men  to  hold  and  teach  the  contrary.  So 
the  prime  cause  was  theirs  still.  Secondly,  A.  C.'s  words 
are  very  considerable ;  for  he  charges  the  protestants  to  be 
the  authors  of  the  schism  for  obstinate  holding  and  teaching 
contrary  opinions.  To  what,  I  pray?  Why,  to  the  k Roman 
faith.  To  the  Roman  faith  !  it  was  wont  to  be  the  Chris- 
tian faith  to  which  contrary  opinions  were  so  dangerous  to 
the  maintainers.  But  all  is  Roman  now  with  A.  C.  and  the 
Jesuit.  And  then,  to  countenance  the  business,  St.  Bernard 
and  St.  Augustine  are  brought  in,  whereas  neither  of  them 
speak  of  the  Roman ;  and  St.  Bernard,  perhaps,  neither  of 
the  catholic  nor  the  Roman,  but  of  a  particular  church  or 
congregation;  or  if  he  speak  of  the  catholic,  of  the  Roman 
certainly  he  doth  not.  His  words  are,  Qua?  major  superbia, 
&c. ;  "  What  greater  pride  than  that  one  man  should  prefer 
his  judgment  before  the  whole  congregation  of  all  the  Chris- 
tian churches  in  the  world  T  So  A.  C.  out  of  St.  Bernard. 
!But  St.  Bernard  not  so.  For  these  last  words,  "  of  all  the 
Christian  churches  in  the  world,"  are  not  in  St.  Bernard. 
And  whether  toti  congregationi  imply  more  in  that  place  than 
a  particular  church,  is  not  very  manifest ;  nay,  I  think  it  is 
plain  that  he  speaks  both  of  and  to  that  particular  congre- 
gation to  which  he  was  then  preaching.  And  I  believe  A.  C. 
will  not  easily  find  where  tota  congregatio,  the  whole  congre- 
gation, is  used  in  St.  Bernard  or  any  other  of  the  Fathers 

k  I  know  Bellarmine  quotes  St.  Je-  mended    it.     But    the    apostle's    com- 

rome :  Scito  Romanam  fidem,  &c.  supra  mending  of  it  in  the   Romans  at  one 

§.  3.  num.  IX.     But  there  St.  Jerome  time  passes  no  deed  of  assurance  that 

doth  not  call  it  fidem  Romanam,  as  if  it  shall   continue  worthy  of  commen- 

fides  Romano,  and  fides  catkolica  were  dations  among  the  Romans  through  all 

convertible ;  but  he  speaks  of  it  in  the  times. 

concrete  :  Romana  fides,   i.  e.    Roma-         '  Qua?  major  superbia,  quam  ut  unus 

norum  fides,  quae  laudatafuit  ab  apostolo,  homo  toti  congregationi  judicium  suum 

&c.,   Rom.   i.   8.     S.  Hieron.  Apol.   3.  praeferat,  tan  quam  ipse  solus  Spiriturn 

cent.  Rufin.,  that  is,  that  faith  which  Dei  habeat  ?     S.  Bernard.  Serm.  3.  de 

was  then  at  Rome  when  St.  Paul  com-  Resur. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  113 

tor  the  whole  catholic  church  of  Christ.     And  howsoever  the  Sect.  21. 

meaning  of  St.  Bernard  be,  it  is  one  thing  for  a  private  man 

judiciwm  suum  prceferre,  to  prefer  and  so  follow  his  private 

judgment   before  the  whole   congregation,   which   is   indeed 

lepra  proprii  consilii,  (as  St.  Bernard  there  calls  it,)  the  proud 

leprosy  of  the  private  spirit ;  and  quite   another  thing  for 

an  intelligent  man,  and  in  some  things  unsatisfied,  modestly 

to  propose   his  doubts  even  to  the  catholic   church.     And 

much  more  may  a  whole  national  church,  nay,  the  whole  body 

of  the  protestants  do  it.     And  for  St.  Augustine,  the  place 

alleged  out  of  him  is  a  known  place.     And  he  speaks  indeed 

of  the  whole  catholic  church.     And  he  msays,  (and  he  says 

it  truly,)  "  It  is  a  part  of  most  insolent  madness  for  any  man 

to  dispute  whether  that  be  to  be  done,  which  is  usually  done 

in  and  through  the  whole  catholic  church  of  Christ."    Where 

first  here  is  not  a  word  of  the  Roman  church,  but  of  that 

which  is  tota  per  orbem,  all  over  the  world,  catholic,  which 

Rome  never  yet  was.     Secondly,   A.  C.   applies  this  to  the  A.  C.  p.  56. 

Roman  faith,  whereas  St.  Augustine  speaks  there  expressly 

of  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  church,  and  "particularly 

about  the  manner  of  offering  upon  Maundy-Thursday,  whether 

it  be  in  the  morning,  or  after  supper,  or  both.     Thirdly,  it  is 

manifest  by  the  words  themselves  that  St.  Augustine  speaks 

of  no  matter  of  faith  there,  Roman  nor   catholic :  for  fre- 

quentat  and  "faciendum  are  for  things  done  and  to  be  done, 

not  for  things  believed  or  to  be  believed.     So  here  is  not  one 

word  for  the  Roman  faith   in  either  of  these  places ;  and 

after  this  I  hope  you  will  the  less  wonder  at  A.  C.'s  boldness. 

Lastly,  a  right  sober  man  may,  without  the  least  touch  of 

insolency  or  madness,  dispute  a  business  of  religion  with  the 

Roman  either  church  or  prelate,  (as  all  men  know  Plrenaeus 

did  with  Victor,)  so  it  be  with  modesty,  and  for  the  finding 

out  or  confirming  of  truth,  free  from  vanity  and  purposed 

m  Similiter  etiam  siquid  horum  tota         °  And  so  Bellarmine  most  expressly, 

per  orbem  frequentat  ecclesia  ?     Nam  But  then  he  adds,  Universam  ecclesiam 

et  hinc  quin  ita  faciendum  sit  disputare,  non    posse   errare,   non   solum  in   cre- 

insolentissimae  insaniae  est.     S.  August,  dendo,  sed  nee  in  operando;  et  praeser- 

Epist.  118.  c.  5.  tim  in  ritu,  et  cultu  divino:  lib.  iv.  de 

n  Quseris  quid  per  quintam  feriam  Verb.  Dei,  c.  9.  §.  4.     And  if  this  be 

ultimas  hebdomadis  quadragesimae  fieri  true,  what  is  it  to  Rome  ? 
debet,   an   offerendmn   sit   mane?  &c.         P  Euseb.   Hist.   Eccl.   lib.   v.    c.   26. 

S.  August.  Ibid.  et  Socrat.  Hist.  lib.  v.  c.  22. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  21.  opposition  against  even  a  particular  church.  But  in  an- 
other way  to  dispute  the  whole  catholic  church,  is  just  that 
which  St.  Augustine  calls  it,  insolent  madness. 

V. — But  now,  were  it  so  that  the  church  of  Rome  were 
orthodox  in  all  things,  yet  the  faith,  by  the  Jesuit's  leave, 
is  not  simply  to  be  called  the  Roman,  but  the  Christian  and 
A.  C.  p. 56.  the  catholic  faith.  And  yet  A.  C.  will  not  understand  this, 
but  Roman  and  catholic,  whether  church  or  faith,  must  be 
one  and  the  same  with  him ;  and  therefore  infers,  "  That 
there  can  be  no  just  cause  to  make  a  schism  or  division  from 
the  whole  church  :  for  the  whole  church  cannot  universally 
err  in  doctrine  of  faith."  That  the  whole  church  cannot 
universally  err  in  the  doctrine  of  faith  is  most  true,  and  it  is 
granted  by  divers  <i  protestants ;  (so  you  will  but  understand 
its  not  erring  in  absolute  fundamental  doctrines  ;)  and  there- 
fore it  is  true  also  that  there  can  be  no  just  cause  to  make 
a  schism  from  the  whole  church  :  but  here  is  the  Jesuit's 

<l  Quaestio  est,  An  ecclesia  totalis  to- 
taliter  considerata,  i.  e.  pro  omnibus 
simul  electis,  dum  sunt  membra  mili- 
tantis  ecclesiae,  possint  errare,  vel  in 
tota  fide,  vel  in  gravi  aliquo  fidei 
puncto  ?  Et  respondimus  simpliciter, 
id  esse  impossibile.  Keckerm.  Syst. 
Theol.  p.  387.  edit.  Hannoviae,  an. 
1602. — Calvinus  et  caeteri  haeretici  con- 
cedunt  ecclesiam  absolute  non  posse 
deficere ;  sed  dicunt  intelligi  debere  de 
ecclesia  invisibili.  Bellarm.  de  Eccles. 
Milit.  lib.  iii.  c.  13.  §.  i.  But  this  ex- 
ception of  Bellarmine's,  that  the  pro- 
testants, whom  out  of  his  liberality  he 
calls  heretics,  speak  of  the  invisible 
church,  is  merely  frivolous.  For  the 
church  of  the  elect  is  in  the  church  of 
them  that  are  called,  and  the  invisible 
church  in  the  visible.  Therefore  if  the 
whole  church  of  the  elect  cannot  err 
in  fundamentals,  the  whole  visible 
church  in  which  the  same  elect  are 
cannot  err.  Now  that  the  invisible 
church  of  the  elect  is  in  the  visible,  is 
manifest  out  of  St.  Augustine;  Ipsa  est 
ecclesia,  quae  intra  sagenam  domimcam 
cum  malis  piscibus  natat.  S.  August. 
Epist.  48. — Grana  sunt  inter  illam  pa- 
leam,  quando  area  cum  videretur  tota, 
palea  putabatur.  S.  August  in  Psal. 
cxxi.  And  this  is  proved  at  large  by 
Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  iii.  §.  i.  For 
else  the  elect  or  invisible  church  is  tied 

to  no  duty  of  Christianity.  For  aB 
such  duties  are  required  of  the  church 
as  it  is  visible,  and  performed  in  the 
church  as  it  is  visible.  As  we  hold 
it  impossible  that  the  church  should 
ever  by  apostasy  and  misbelief  wholly 
depart  from  God,  &c.,  so  we  hold  that 
it  never  falls  into  heresy.  So  that 
Bellarmine  is  as  much  to  be  blamed  for 
idle  and  needless  busying  himself  to 
prove,  that  the  visible  church  never 
falls  into  heresy,  which  we  most  wil- 
lingly grant,  (Field,  de  Eccles.  lib.  iv. 
c.  2.)  taking  the  church  for  all  the 
believers  now  living,  and  in  things 
necessary  to  be  known  expressly.  Ibid. 
Calvinus  dicit  hanc  propositionem — Ec- 
clesia non  potest  errare — veram  ess?,  si 
intelligatur  cum  duplici  restrictione. 
Prima  est,  si  non  proponat  dogmata 
extra  scripturam,  &c.  (And  indeed 
Calvin  doth  say  so,  Instit.  lib.  iv.  c.  8 
§.  13.)  Secunda  est,  si  intelligatur  de 
sola  ecclesia  universal!,  non  autem  de 
repraesentativa.  Bellarm.  cleEccl.  Milit. 
lib.  iii.  c.  14.  §.  2.  And  I  hope  it  is  as 
good  and  a  better  restriction  in  Calvin, 
to  say  the  catholic  church  cannot  err 
if  it  keep  to  the  scriptiire,  than  for 
Bellarmine  to  say  the  particular  church 
of  Rome  cannot  err  because  of  the 
pope's  residing  there,  or  the  pope  can- 
not err  if  he  keep  his  chair  ;  which  yet 
he  affirms,  de  Rom.  Pont. lib.  iv.  0.4.  §.  2. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  115 

cunning;  the  whole  church  with  him  is  the  Roman,  and  those  Sect  21. 
parts  of  Christendom  which  subject  themselves  to  the  Roman 
bishop  ;  all  other  parts  of  Christendom  are  in  heresy  and 
schism,  and  what  A.  C.  pleases.  Nay,  soft;  for  another 
church  may  separate  from  Rome,  if  Rome  will  separate  from 
Christ ;  and  so  far  as  it  ^separates  from  him  and  the  faith, 
so  far  may  another  church  separate  from  it.  And  this  is  all 
that  the  learned  protestants  do  or  can  say,  and  I  am  sure  all 
that  ever  the  church  of  England  hath  either  said  or  done. 
And  that  the  whole  church  cannot  err  in  doctrines  absolutely 
fundamental  and  necessary  to  all  men's  salvation  (besides  the 
authority  of  these  protestants,  most  of  them  being  of  prime 
rank)  seems  to  me  to  be  clear  by  the  promise  of  Christ,  St. 
Matth.  xvi.,  Tthat  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it; 
whereas  most  certain  it  is  that  the  gates  of  hell  prevail  very 
far  against  it,  if  the  whole  militant  church  universally  taken 
can  err  from  or  in  the  foundation:  but  then  this  power  of 
not  erring  is  not  to  be  conceived  as  if  it  were  in  the  church 
primo  et  per  se,  originally,  or  by  any  power  it  hath  of  itself: 
for  the  church  is  constituted  of  men,  and  humoMum  est  ermre, 
all  men  can  err.  But  this  power  is  in  it  partly  by  the  virtue 
of  this  promise  of  Christ,  and  partly  by  the  matter  which  it 
teacheth,  which  is  the  unerring  word  of  God,  so  plainly  and 
manifestly  delivered  to  her,  as  that  it  is  not  possible  she 
should  universally  fall  from  it  or  teach  against  it  in  things 
absolutely  necessary  to  salvation.  Besides,  it  would  be  well 
weighed,  whether  to  believe  or  teach  otherwise  will  not  im- 
peach the  article  of  the  Creed  concerning  the  holy  catholic 
church,  which  we  profess  we  believe ;  for  the  "  holy  catholic 
church  there  spoken  of  contains  not  only  the  whole  militant 
church  on  earth,  but  the  whole  triumphant  also  in  heaven ;" 
for  so  s  St.  Augustine  hath  long  since  taught  me.  Now  if 
the  whole  catholic  church  in  this  large  extent  be  holy,  then 
certainly  the  whole  militant  church  is  holy  as  well  as  the 
triumphant ;  though  in  a  far  lower  degree,  inasmuch  as  all 
tsanctification,  all  holiness,  is  imperfect  in  this  life,  as  well  in 

r  Matt.  xvi.  18.  in  coelis,  &c.     S.August.  Enchir.  c.  56. 

s  Ecclesia  hie  tota  accipienda  est,  non         t  Nemo  ex  toto  sanctus.  Optat.  lib. 

solum  ex  parte  qua  peregrinatur  in  ter-  vii.  contra  Panneu. 
ris,  &c.  verum  etiuni  ex  ilia  parte  quae 

I   2 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  21.  churches  as  in  men.  Holy  then  the  whole  militant  church 
is.  For  that  which  the  apostle  speaks  of  Abraham  is  true 
of  the  church,  which  is  a  body  collective,  made  up  of  the 
spiritual  seed  of  Abraham :  ^If  the  root  be  holy,  so  are  the 
branches.  Well,  then,  the  whole  militant  church  is  holy,  and 
so  we  believe.  Why,  but  will  it  not  follow  then,  that  the 
whole  militant  church  cannot  possibly  err  in  the  foundations 
of  the  faith  ?  That  she  may  err  in  superstructures  and  de- 
ductions, and  other  by  and  unnecessary  truths,  if  her  curiosity 
or  other  weakness  carry  her  beyond  or  cause  her  to  fall  short 
of  her  rule,  no  doubt  need  be  made ;  but  if  she  can  err 
either  from  the  foundation  or  in  it,  she  can  be  no  longer  holy, 
and  that  article  of  the  Creed  is  gone.  For  if  she  can  err 
quite  from  the  foundation,  then  she  is  nor  holy  nor  church, 
but  becomes  an  infidel.  Now  this  cannot  be,  for  xall  divines, 
ancient  and  modern,  Romanists  and  reformers,  agree  in  this, 
"  That  the  whole  militant  church  of  Christ  cannot  fall  away 
into  general  apostasy ."  And  if  she  err  in  the  foundation, 
that  is,  in  some  one  or  more  fundamental  points  of  faith,  then 
she  may  be  a  church  of  Christ  still,  but  not  holy,  but  becomes 
heretical :  and  most  certain  it  is,  that  no  7  assembly  (be  it 
never  so  general)  of  such  heretics  is  or  can  be  holy.  Other 
errors  that  are  of  a  t  meaner  allay  take  not  holiness  from  the 
church,  but  these  that  are  dyed  in  grain  cannot  consist  with 
holiness ;  of  which  faith  in  Christ  is  the  very  foundation. 
And  therefore,  if  we  will  keep  up  our  Creed,  the  whole  mili- 
tant church  must  be  still  holy.  For  if  it  be  not  so  still, 
then  there  may  be  a  time  that  falswm  may  subesse  fidei 
catholicce,  that  falsehood,  and  that  in  a  high  degree,  in  the 
very  article,  may  be  the  subject  of  the  catholic  faith ;  which 
were  no  less  than  blasphemy  to  affirm :  for  we  must  still 
believe  the  holy  catholic  church.  And  if  she  be  not  still 

Rom.  xi.  1 6.  §.    3. — Ipsa    symbol!    dispositione    ad- 

x  Dum  Christus  orat  in  excelso,  na-  monetur  perpetuam  residere  in  ecdesra 

vicula  (id  est,  ecclesia)  turbatur  flucti-  Christ!  remissionem  peccatorum.    Calv. 

bus  in  profundo,  &c. ;  sed  quia  Christus  Instit.  lib.  iv.  c.  i.  §.  1 7.  Now  remission 

orat,    nori    potest    mergi.     S.  August,  of   sins    cannot    be   perpetual    in    the 

Serm.   14.   de  Verb.    Dom.    c.    2.     Et  church,  if  the  church  itself  be  not  per- 

Bellarm.  de  Eccles.  Milit.  lib.  iii.  c.  13.  petual :  but   the   church   itself  cannot 

-Praesidio  Christ!  fulcitur  ecclesia?  per-  be  perpetual  if  it  fall  away, 

petuitas,    ut    inter    turbulentas    agita-  y  Spiritus  sanctificationis  non  potest 

tioues,  et  formidabiles  motus,  &c.  salva  inveniri   in   haereticorum   mentibus,  S. 

tamen  maneat.  Calvin.  Inst.  lib.  ii.  c.  15.  Hieron.  in  Jerem.  x. 

FisJwr  the  Jesuit.  117 

holy,  then  at  that  time  when  she  is  not  so  we  believe  a  false-  Sect.  21. 
hood  under  the  article  of  the  catholic  faith.  Therefore  a  very 
dangerous  thing  it  is  to  cry  out  in  general  terms  that  the 
whole  catholic  militant  church  can  err,  and  not  limit  nor 
distinguish  in  time  that  it  can  err  indeed;  for  ignorance  it 
hath,  and  ignorance  can  err;  but  err  it  cannot,  either  by 
falling  totally  from  the  foundation,  or  by  heretical  error  in  it : 
for  the  holiness  of  the  church  consists  as  much,  if  not  more, 
in  the  verity  of  the  faith,  as  in  the  integrity  of  manners 
taught  and  commanded  in  the  doctrine  of  faith. 

VI. — Now  in  this  discourse  A.  0.  thinks  he  hath  met  with  A.  C.  p.  56. 
me ;  for  he  tells  me,  "  That  I  may  not  only  safely  grant  that 
protestants  made  the  division  that  is  now  in  the  church,  but 
further  also,  and  that  with  a  safe  confidence,  as  one  did — 
was  it  not  you  T  saith  he — "  that  it  was  ill  done  of  those  who 
first  made  the  separation."  Truly  I  do  not  now  remember 
whether  I  said  it  or  no ;  but  because  A.  C.  shall  have  full 
satisfaction  from  me,  and  without  any  tergiversation,  if  I  did 
not  say  it  then,  I  do  say  it  now :  and  most  true  it  is,  that 
it  was  ill  done  of  those,  whoever  they  were,  that  first  made 
the  separation.  But  then  A.  C.  must  not  understand  me  of 
actual  only,  but  of  casual  separation :  for  (as  I  said  z before) 
the  schism  is  theirs  whose  the  cause  of  it  is ;  and  he  makes 
the  separation  that  gives  the  first  just  cause  of  it,  not  he  that 
makes  an  actual  separation  upon  a  just  cause  preceding.  And 
this  is  so  evident  a  truth  that  A.  C.  cannot  deny  it,  for  he 
says  it  is  most  true :  neither  can  he  deny  it  in  this  sense  in  A.  C.  p.  56. 
which  I  have  expressed  it ;  for  his  very  assertion  against  us 
(though  false)  is  in  these  terms,  "  that  we  gave  the  first 
cause ;"  therefore  he  must  mean  it  of  casual,  not  of  actual 
separation  only. 

VII.— But  then  A.  C.  goes  on  and  tells  us,  "That  after  A.  c.  P.5;. 
this  breach  was  made,  yet  the  church  of  Rome  was  so  kind 
and  careful  to  seek  the  protestants,  that  she  invited  them 
publicly  with  safe-conduct  to  Rome,  to  a  general  council, 
freely  to  speak  what  they  could  for  themselves."  Indeed, 
I  think  the  church  of  Rome  did  carefully  seek  the  protest- 
ants, but  I  doubt  it  was  to  bring  them  within  their  net :  and 

z  Sect.  21.  num.  I. 

1  3 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  21.  she  invited  them  to  Rome;  a  very  safe  place,  if  you  mark  it, 
for  them  to  come  to;  just  as  the  lion  (in  the  a apologue) 
invited  the  fox  to  his  own  den.  Yea,  but  there  was  safe-con- 
duct offered  too.  Yes,  conduct  perhaps,  but  not  safe ;  or  safe 
perhaps  for  going  thither,  but  none  for  coming  thence ;  vesti- 
gia nulla  retrorsum.  Yea,  but  it  should  have  been  to  a 
general  council.  Perhaps  so.  But  was  the  conduct  safe  that 
was  given  for  coming  to  a  council  which  they  call  general  to 
some  others  before  them?  No  sure,  bJohn  Huss  and  Jerome 
of  Prague  burnt  for  all  their  safe-conduct.  And  so  long  as 
the  c  Jesuits  write  and  maintain  that  "  faith  given  is  not  to  be 
kept  with  heretics,"  and  the  church  of  Rome  leaves  this  lewd 
doctrine  uncensured,  (as  it  hath  hitherto  done,  and  no  ex- 

a  OKm  quod  vulpes  aegroto  cauta  leoni 
Respondit,  referam,  Quia  me  vesti- 
gia terrent 

Omnia  te  adversum  spectantia,  nulla 

Hor.  lib.  i.  ep.  I.  ex  JEsop. 

b  Though  I  cannot  justify  all  which 
these  two  men  said,  yet  safe-conduct 
being  given,  that  public  faith  ought  not 
to  have  been  violated. 

c  Affirmant  uno  consensu  omnes  ea- 
tholici,  debere  haereticis  servari  fidem, 
sive  salvus-conductus  concedatur,  jure 
communi  sive  special!.  Bee.  Dis.  Theol. 
de  Fide  Haereticis  servanda,  c.  12.  §.5. 
But  for  all  this  brag  of  "  Affirmant 
uno  consensu  omnes  catholici,"  Becanus 
shuffles  pitifully  to  defend  the  council 
of  Constance  :  for  thus  he  argues ;  Fides 
won  est  violata  Husso.  Non  a  patribus : 
illi  enim  fidem  non  dederunt.  Non  ab 
imperatore  Sigismundo  :  ille  enim  dedit 
iidem,  sed  non  violavit.  Ibid.  §.7.  But 
all  men  know  that  the  emperor  was 
used  by  the  Fathers  at  Constance  to 
bring  Huss  thither ;  Sigismundus  Hus- 
suni  Constantium  vocat,  et  missis  literia 
publica  fide  cavet,  mense  Octob.  anno 
1414.  &c.  edit,  in  16. — Et  etiamsi  pri- 
mo  graviter  tulit  Hussi  in  carceratio- 
nem,  tamen  cum  dicerent  "  Fidem  hae- 
reticis non  esse  servandam,"  non  modo 
remisit  offensionem,  sed  et  primus  acer- 
be  in  eum  pronunciavit.  Ibid.  This  is 
a  mockery :  and  Becanus  his  argument 
is  easily  turned  upon  himself.  For  if 
the  Fathers  did  it  in  cunning,  that  the 
emperor  should  give  safe-conduct  which 
themselves  meant  not  to  keep,  then  they 
broke  faith :  and  if  the  emperor  knew 

they  would  not  keep  it,  then  he  himself 
broke  faith,  in  giving  a  safe  conduct 
which  he  knew  to  be  invalid.  And  as 
easy  is  it  to  answer  what  Becanus  adds 
to  save  that  council's  act,  could  I  stay 
upon  it. 

Fides  haereticis  data  servanda  non 
est,  sicut  nee  tyrannis,  piratis  et  eaeteris 
publicis  praedonibus,  &c.  Simanca,  In- 
stit.  Tit.  46.  §  51.  And  although  Be- 
canus in  the  place  above  cited,  §.  13, 
confidently  denies  that  the  Fathers  at 
Constance  decreed  "  no  faith  to  be  kept 
with  heretics,"  and  cites  the  words  of 
the  council,  Sess.  19,  yet  there  the  very 
words  themselves  have  it  thus  :  Posse 
concilium  eos  punire,  &c.  etiamsi  de 
salvo-conductu  confisi  ad  locum  vene- 
rint  judicii,  &c.  And  much  more  plain- 
ly Simanca,  Instit.  46.  §.52;  Jure  igi- 
tur  haeretici  quidam  gravissimo  concilii 
Constantiensis  judicio  legitima  flamma 
concremati  sunt,  quamvis  proniissa  illis 
securitas  fuisset.  So  they  are  not  only 
protestants  which  charge  the  council  of 
Constance  with  this  :  nor  can  Becanus 
say  as  he  doth,  Affirmant  uno  consensu 
omnes  catholici,  fidem  haereticis  servan- 
dam esse :  for  Simanca  denies  it ;  and 
he  quotes  others  for  it  which  A.  C. 
would  be  loath  should  not  be  accounted 
catholics.  But  how  faithfully  Simanca 
says  the  one,  or  Becanus  the  other,  let 
them  take  it  between  them,  and  the 
reader  be  judge.  In  the  mean  time 
the  very  title  of  the  canon  of  the  coun- 
cil of  Constance,  Sess.  19,  is  this  :  Quod 
non  obstantibus  salvis-conductibus  im- 
peratoris,  regum,  &c.  possit  per  judicem 
competentem  de  haeretica  pravitate  in- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  119 

ception  put  in  of  force  and  violence,)  A.  C.  shall  pardon  us  Sect.  21. 
that  we  come  not  to  Rome,  nor  within  the  reach  of  Roman 
power,  what  freedom  of  speech  soever  be  promised  us.  For 
to  what  end  is  freedom  of  speech  on  their  part,  d  since  they 
are  resolved  to  alter  nothing?  and  to  what  end  freedom  of 
speech  on  our  part,  if  after  speech  hath  been  free,  life  shall 

VIII.— And  yet  for  all  this  A.  C.  "makes  no  doubt  but  A.  C.  p.  5  7. 
that  the  Roman  church  is  so  far  from  being  cause  of  the 
continuance  of  the  schism,  or  hinderance  of  the  reunion,  that 
it  would  yet  give  a  free  hearing  with  most  ample  safe-con- 
duct, if  any  hope  might  be  given  that  the  protestants  would 
sincerely  seek  nothing  but  truth  and  peace."  Truly  A.  C.  is 
very  resolute  for  the  Roman  church ;  yet  how  far  he  may 
undertake  for  it  I  cannot  tell ;  but  for  my  part,  I  am  of  the 
same  opinion  for  the  continuing  of  the  schism  that  I  was  for 
the  making  of  it ;  that  is,  that  it  is  ill,  very  ill  done  of  those, 
whoever  they  be,  papists  or  protestants,  that  give  just  cause 
to  continue  a  separation.  But  for  free  hearings  or  safe- 
conducts  I  have  said  enough,  till  that  church  do  not  only  say 
but  do  otherwise.  And  as  for  truth  and  peace,  they  are  in 
every  man's  mouth  with  you  and  with  us ;  but  lay  they  but 
half  so  close  to  the  hearts  of  men  as  they  are  common  on 
their  tongues,  it  would  soon  be  better  with  Christendom  than 
at  this  day  it  is,  or  is  like  to  be.  And  for  the  protestants  in 
general,  I  hope  they  seek  both  truth  and  peace  sincerely : 
the  church  of  England  I  am  sure  doth,  and  hath  taught  me 
to  epray  for  both,  as  I  most  heartily  do;  but  what  Rome 
doth  in  this,  if  the  world  will  not  see,  I  will  not  censure. 

IX. — And  for  that  which  A.C.  adds,  "That  such  a  free  A  C.  p.  57. 
hearing  is  more  than  ever  the  English  catholics  could  obtain, 
though  they  have  often  offered  and  desired  it,  and  that  but 
under  the  prince's  word ;  and  that  no  answer  hath,  nor  no 

d  For  so  much  A.  C.  confesses,  p .45.  erat  doctrinam   earn  non  probare,  sed 

For   if  they  should   give  way   to   the  quam  antea  didicissent  finniter  tenere, 

altering  of  one,  then  why  not  of  an-  &c.    Hist.  Concil.  Trid.  lib.  ii.  p.  277. 

other,  and  another,  and  so  of  all  ?  And  edit.  Leyd.  1622. 

the  Trent  Fathers  in  a  great  point  of         e  Beseeching  God  to  inspire  eontinu- 

doctrine  being  amazed,  and  not  know-  ally  the  universal  church  with  the  spirit 

ing  what  to  answer  to  a  bishop  of  their  of  truth,  unity,  and  concord,  &c.  in  the 

own,  yet  were  resolved  not  to  part  with  prayer  for  the  militant  church,  and  in 

their  common   error.     Certum   tamen  the  third  collect  on  Good  Friday. 

1  4 

1<20  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  11, 22. good  answer  can  be  given."  And  he  cites  Campian  for  it. 
How  far  or  how  often  this  hath  been  asked  by  the  English 
Romanists  I  cannot  tell,  nor  what  answer  hath  been  given 
them ;  but  surely  Campian  was  too  bold,  and  so  is  A.  C.  too, 
to  say  *honestum  responsum  nullum,  no  good  answer  can  be 
given;  for  this,  I  think,  is  a  very  good  answer — that  the 
kings  and  the  church  of  England  had  no  reason  to  admit  of 
a  public  dispute  with  the  English  Romish  clergy,  till  they 
shall  be  able  to  shew  it  under  the  seal  or  powers  of  Rome, 
that  that  church  will  submit  to  a  third,  who  may  be  an  indif- 
ferent judge  between  us  and  them,  or  to  such  a  general 
council  as  is  §  after  mentioned.  And  this  is  an  honest,  and 
I  think  a  full  answer.  And  without  this  all  disputation  must 
end  in  clamour :  and  therefore  the  more  public  the  worse ; 
because  as  the  clamour  is  the  greater,  so  perhaps  will  be  the 
schism  too. 

dp.  Moreover  he  said  he  would  ingenuously  acknowledge 
that  the  corruption  of  manners  in  the  Romish  church 
was  not  a  sufficient  cause  to  justify  their  departing 
from  it. 

Soot.  22.  ij.  I  would  I  could  say  you  did  as  ingenuously  repeat  as 
I  did  confess ;  for  I  never  said  that  corruption  of  manners 
was  or  was  not  a  sufficient  cause  to  justify  their  departure. 
How  could  I  say  this,  since  I  did  not  grant  that  they  did 
depart  otherwise  than  is  h  before  expressed  ?  There  is  differ- 
ence between  departure  and  causeless  thrusting  from  you; 
for  out  of  the  church  is  not  in  your  power  (Grod  be  thanked) 
to  thrust  us :  think  on  that.  And  so  much  I  said  expressly 
then.  That  which  I  did  ingenuously  confess  was  this,  "  That 
corruption  in  manners  only  is  no  sufficient  cause  to  make  a 
separation  in  the  church ;"  'nor  is  it :  it  is  a  truth  agreed  on 
by  the  Fathers,  and  received  by  divines  of  all  sorts,  save  by 
the  Cathari,  to  whom  the  Donatist  and  the  Anabaptist  after 
accorded,  and  against  whom  k  Calvin  disputes  it  strongly. 
And  ]St.  Augustine  is  plain:  "There  are  bad  fish  in  the  net 

f  Campian.  Praef.  Rationibus  praefixa.         k  Jnstit.  lib.  iv.  c.  I.  §.  13,  &e. 
',  Sect.  26.  num.  I.  1  Ep.  48.  A  malis  piscibus  corde  senj- 

h  Sect.  21.  num.  VI.  per  et  moribus  separantur,  &c. ;  rorpo- 

i   Moclo  ea  quae  ad  cathedram  perti-  ralem  separationem  in  littore  man's,  ho<- 

nent.  recta  pnedpiant.  S.  Hier.  Ep.  236.  est,  in  fine  saeculi  expectant. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  121 

of  the  Lord,  from  which  there  must  be  ever  a  separation  in  Sect.  22,23. 
heart  and  in  manners ;  but  a  corporal  separation  must  be 
expected  at  the  seashore,  that  is,  the  end  of  the  world."  And 
the  best  fish  that  are  must  not  tear  and  break  the  net  be- 
cause the  bad  are  with  them.  And  this  is  as  ingenuously 
confessed  for  you  as  by  me  :  for  if  corruption  in  manners  were 
a  just  cause  of  actual  separation  of  one  church  from  another 
in  that  catholic  body  of  Christ,  the  church  of  Rome  hath 
given  as  great  cause  as  any ;  "  since  (as  m  Stapleton  grants) 
there  is  scarce  any  sin  that  can  be  thought  by  man  (heresy 
only  excepted)  with  which  that  see  hath  not  been  foully 
stained,  especially  from  eight  hundred  years  after  Christ." 
And  he  need  not  except  heresy,  into  which  uBiel  grants  it 
possible  the  bishops  of  that  see  may  fall.  And  °  Stella  and 
Almain  grant  it  freely  that  some  of  them  did  fall,  and  so 
ceased  to  be  heads  of  the  church,  and  left  Christ  (God  be 
thanked)  at  that  time  of  his  vicars'  defection  to  look  to  his 
cure  himself. 

$.  But,  saith  he,  beside  corruption  of  manners,  there  were 
also  errors  in  doctrine. 

33.  This  I  spake  indeed.  And  can  you  prove  that  I  spake  Sect.  23. 
not  true  in  this?  But  I  added,  (though  here  again  you  are 
pleased  to  omit  it,)  "  That  some  of  the  errors  of  the  Roman 
church  were  dangerous  to  salvation."  For  it  is  not  every 
light  error  in  disputable  doctrine  and  points  of  curious  specu- 
lation that  can  be  a  just  cause  of  separation  in  that  admirable 
body  of  Christ  which  is  his  P  church,  or  of  one  member  of  it 
from  another :  for  he  gave  his  natural  body  to  be  rent  and 
torn  upon  the  cross,  that  his  mystical  body  might  be  one. 
And  q  St.  Augustine  infers  upon  it,  "  That  he  is  no  way  par- 
taker of  divine  charity  that  is  an  enemy  to  this  unity."  Now 
what  errors  in  doctrine  may  give  just  cause  of  separation  in 
this  body,  or  the  parts  of  it  one  from  another,  were  it  never 

m  Vix  ullum  peccatura  (sola  haeresi  decretales  htereticse,  &c.     And  so  they 

excepta)  cogitari  potest,  quo  ilia  sedes  erred  as  popes. 

turpiter  maculata  non  fuerit,  maxirne  P  Eph.  i.  23. 

a!>   anno  800.     Relect.  Cont.   T.   q.  5.  Q  S.  August.  Epist.  50. — Et  iterum 

Art.  3.  columbae  non  sunt  qui  ecclesiam  dissi- 

n  Biel.  in  Can.  Miss.  Lect.  23.  pant.  Accipitres  sunt,  milvi  sunt :  non 

°  Stel.  in  S.  Luc.  c.  22.  Almain.  in  laniat  columba,  &c.  S.  August.  Tract.  5. 

3.  Sent.  D.  24.  q.  i.  fine.    Multae  sunt  in  S.  Joh. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  23, 24.  so  easy  to  determine,  (as  I  think  it  is  most  difficult,)  I  would 
not  venture  to  set  it  down  in  particular,  lest  in  these  times 
of  discord  I  might  be  thought  to  open  a  door  for  schism; 
which  surely  I  will  never  do,  unless  it  be  to  let  it  out.  But 
that  there  are  errors  in  doctrine,  and  some  of  them  such  as 
most  manifestly  endanger  salvation,  in  the  church  of  Rome, 
is  evident  to  them  that  will  not  shut  their  eyes ;  the  proof 
whereof  runs  through  the  particular  points  that  are  between 

A.  C.  p.  55.  us,  and  so  is  too  long  for  this  discourse.  Now  here  A.  0. 
would  fain  have  a  reason  given  him  "  why  I  did  endeavour  to 
shew  what  cause  the  protestants  had  to  make  that  rent  or 
division,  if  I  did  not  grant  that  they  made  it  2"  Why  truly 
in  this  reasonable  demand  I  will  satisfy  him.  I  did  it  partly 
because  I  had  granted  it  in  the  general,  that  corruption  in 
manners  was  no  sufficient  cause  of  separation  of  one  parti- 
cular church  from  another,  and  therefore  it  lay  upon  me  at 
least  to  name  in  general  what  was;  and  partly  because  he 
and  his  party  will  needs  have  it  so  that  we  did  make  the 
separation :  and  therefore,  though  I  did  not  grant  it,  yet  amiss 
I  thought  it  could  not  be  to  declare,  by  way  of  supposition, 
that  if  the  protestants  did  at  first  separate  from  the  church 

A.  C.  p.  56.  of  Rome,  they  had  reason  so  to  do ;  for  A.  C.  himself  con- 
fesses, "  That  error  in  doctrine  of  the  faith  is  a  just  cause  of 
separation,  so  just  as  that  no  cause  is  just  but  that."  Now 
had  I  leisure  to  descend  into  particulars,  or  will  to  make  the 
rent  in  the  church  wider,  it  is  no  hard  matter  to  prove  that 
the  church  of  Rome  hath  erred  in  the  doctrine  of  faith,  and 
dangerously  too :  and  I  doubt  I  shall  afterwards  descend  to 
particulars,  A.  C.  his  importunity  forcing  me  to  it. 

£-.  Which  when  the  general  church  would  not  reform,  it 
was  lawful  for  particular  churches  to  reform  them- 

Sect.  24.  23.  I. — Is  it  then  such  a  strange  thing  that  a  particular 
church  may  reform  itself,  if  the  general  will  not?  I  had 
thought,  and  do  so  still,  that  in  point  of  reformation  of  either 
manners  or  doctrine,  it  is  lawful  for  the  church  since  Christ 
to  do  as  the  church  before  Christ  did  and  might  do.  The 
church  before  Christ  consisted  of  Jews  and  proselytes :  this 
church  came  to  have  a  separation  upon  a  most  ungodly  policy 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

of  r  Jeroboam's,  so  that  it  never  pieced  together  again.  To  a  Sect.  24. 
common  council,  to  reform  all,  they  would  not  come.  Was 
it  not  lawful  for  Judah  to  reform  herself  when  Israel  would 
not  join  ?  Sure  it  was,  or  else  the  prophet  deceives  me,  that 
says  expressly,  s  Though  Israel  transgress,  yet  let  not  Judah  sin. 
And  St.  Jerome  l expounds  it  of  this  very  particular  sin  of 
heresy  and  error  in  religion.  Nor  can  you  say  that  u  Israel 
from  the  time  of  the  separation  was  not  a  church ;  for  there 
were  true  prophets  in  it,  xElias,  and  yElisseus,  and  others, 
and  z thousands  that  had  not  botved  Jcnees  to  Baal:  and  there 
was  salvation  for  these,  which  cannot  be  in  the  ordinary  way 
where  there  is  no  church.  And  God  threatens  to  acast  them 
away  to  wander  among  the  nations,  and  be  no  congregation, 
no  church :  therefore  he  had  not  yet  cast  them  away  in  non 
ecclesiam,  into  no  church.  And  they  are  expressly  called 
b  the  people  of  the  Lord  in  Jehu's  time,  and  so  continued  long 
after.  Nor  can  you  plead  that  Judah  is  your  part  and  the 
ten  tribes  ours,  (as  some  of  you  do ;)  for  if  that  be  true,  you 
must  grant  that  the  multitude  and  greater  number  is  ours ; 
and  where  then  is  multitude,  your  numerous  note  of  the 
church?  for  the  ten  tribes  were  more  than  the  two.  But 
you  cannot  plead  it ;  for  certainly,  if  any  calves  be  set  up, 
they  are  in  Dan  and  in  Bethel,  they  are  not  ours. 

II. — Besides,  to  reform  what  is  amiss  in  doctrine  or  man- 
ners is  as  lawful  for  a  particular  church  as  it  is  to  publish 
and  promulgate  any  thing  that  is  catholic  in  either ;  and 
your  question,  quo  judice  ?  lies  alike  against  both.  And  yet 
I  think  it  may  be  proved  that  the  church  of  Rome,  and  that 
as  a  particular  church,  did  promulgate  an  orthodox  truth 
which  was  not  then  catholicly  admitted  in  the  church,  namely, 
the  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Son.  If  she 
erred  in  this  fact,  confess  her  error;  if  she  erred  not,  why 
may  not  another  particular  church  do  as  she  did  ?  A  learned 

r  3  Reg.  xii.  27.  s  Hos.  iv.  15.  septem  ilia  millia  fuisse  statuo,  qui  in 

t  Super  haereticis  prona  intelligentia  persecutione  sub  Achabo  Deum  sibi  ab 

est.  S.  Ilieron.  ibid.  idololatria  immunes  reservarunt,  riec 

u  Non  tameii  cessavit  Deus  et  popu-  genna  ante  Baal  flexerunt.  Fran.  JMon- 

lum  hunc  arguere  per  prophetas.    Nam  ceius,  de  Vit.  Aureo,  lib.  i.  c.  1 2. 

ibi  extiterunt  magni  illi  et  insignes  pro-  x  3  Reg.  xvii.  sub  Achabo. 

phetai  Elias  et  Elizaeus,  &c.    S.  August.  y  4  Reg.  iii.  sub  Jehoram  filio  Acliabi. 

de  Civ.  Dei,  lib.  xvii.  c.  22 — Multi  re-  z  3  Reg.  xix.  18. 

ligiose  intra  se  Dei  cultum  habebant,  a  Hos.  ix.  17. 

&c.    De  quo  numero  eorumve  posteris  b  4  Reg.  ix.  6. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  24.  schoolman  of  yours  saith  she  may:  "cThe  church  of  Rome 
needed  not  to  call  the  Grecians  to  agree  upon  this  truth, 
since  the  authority  of  publishing  it  was  in  the  church  of 
Rome ;  especially  since  it  is  lawful  for  every  particular  church 
to  promulgate  that  which  is  catholic."  Nor  can  you  say  he 
means  catholic  as  foredetermined  by  the  church  in  general ; 
for  so  this  point,  when  Rome  added  Filioque  to  the  creed  of  a 
general  council,  was  not.  And  how  the  Grecians  were  used 
in  the  after-council  (such  as  it  was)  of  Florence,  is  not  to 
trouble  this  dispute ;  but  catholic  stands  there  for  that  which 
is  so  in  the  nature  of  it  and  fundamentally.  Nor  can  you 
justly  say  that  the  church  of  Rome  did  or  might  do  this  by 
the  pope's  authority  over  the  church :  for  suppose  he  have 
that,  and  that  his  sentence  be  infallible,  (I  say,  suppose  both, 
but  I  give  neither,)  yet  neither  his  authority  nor  his  infalli- 
bility can  belong  unto  him  as  the  particular  bishop  of  that 
see,  but  as  the  d ministerial  head  of  the  whole  church.  And 
you  are  all  so  lodged  in  this,  that  eBellarmine  professes  he 
can  neither  tell  the  year  when  nor  the  pope  under  whom  this 
addition  was  made.  A  particular  church  then,  if  you  judge 
it  by  the  school  of  Rome  or  the  practice  of  Rome,  may 
publish  any  thing  that  is  catholic  where  the  whole  church 
is  silent,  and  may  therefore  reform  any  thing  that  is  not 
catholic  where  the  whole  church  is  negligent  or  will  not. 

III. — But  you  are  as  jealous  of  the  honour  of  Rome  as 
f  Capellus  is,  who  is  angry  with  Baronius  about  certain  canons 
in  the  second  Milevitan  council,  and  saith,  "That  he  con- 
sidered not  of  what  consequence  it  was  to  grant  to  particular 
churches  the  power  of  making  canons  of  faith  without  con- 
sulting the  Roman  see,  which  (as  he  saith,  and  you  with  him) 
was  never  lawful,  nor  ever  done."  But  suppose  this  were  so, 

c  Non  oportuit  ad  hoc  eos  vocare,  crept  in,  we  must  be  bound  to  tell  the 

quum  authoritas  fuerit  publicandi  apud  plane  and  the  time,  and  I  know  not 

ecclesiam  Romanam,  praecipue  cum  uni-  what,  of  their  beginnings,  or  else  they 

cuique  etiam  particular!  ecclesiae  liceat,  are  not  errors ;  as  if  some  errors  might 

id  quod  catholicum  est,  promulgare.  not  want  a  record  as  well  as  some 

Alb.  Magn.  in  i.  Dist.  u.  A.  9.  truth. 

d  Non  errare,  convenit  papae,  tit  est  f  Omnino  recte,  nisi  excepisset,  &c. 

caput.  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  Nee  consideravit  quanti  referat  conce- 

c-  $•  dere  ecclesiis  particularibus  jus  conden- 

s  De  Christo,  lib.  ii.  c.  21.  §.  Quarido  dorum  canonum  de  fide,  inconsulta  Ro- 

autem. — So  you  cannot  find  records  of  mana  sede,  quod  nunquam  licuit,  nuu- 

your  own  truths,  which  are  far  more  quam  factum  est,  &c.  Capel.  de  Appel- 

hkely  to  be  kept;  but  when  errors  are  lat.  Eccl.  African*,  c.  2.  num.  12. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  125 

my  speech  was  not  not  consulting,  but  in  case  of  neglecting  or  Sect.  24. 
refusing,  or  when  the  difficulty  of  time  and  place,  or  other 
circumstances,  are  such  that  a  ^general  council  cannot  be 
called,  or  not  convene.  For  that  the  Roman  see  must  be 
consulted  with  before  any  reformation  be  made,  first,  most 
certain  it  is  Capellus  can  never  prove,  and  secondly,  as  cer- 
tain, that  were  it  proved  and  practised  we  should  have  no 
reformation ;  for  it  would  be  long  enough  before  the  church 
should  be  cured  if  that  see  alone  should  be  her  physician, 
which  in  truth  is  her  disease. 

IV. — Now  if  for  all  this  you  will  say  still  that  a  provincial 
council  will  not  suffice,  but  we  should  have  borne  with  things 
till  the  time  of  a  general  council ;  first,  it  is  true,  a  general 
council,  free  and  entire,  would  have  been  the  best  remedy  and 
most  able  for  a  gangrene  that  had  spread  so  far  and  eaten 
so  deep  into  Christianity.  But  what  should  we  have  suffered 
this  gangrene  to  endanger  life  and  all  rather  than  be  cured 
in  time  by  a  physician  of  a  weaker  knowledge  and  a  less  able 
hand !  Secondly,  we  live  to  see  since,  if  we  had  stayed  and 
expected  a  general  council,  what  manner  of  one  we  should 
have  had,  if  any :  for  that  at  Trent  was  neither  general  nor 
free ;  and  for  the  errors  which  Rome  had  contracted,  it  con- 
firmed them,  it  cured  them  not.  And  yet  I  much  doubt 
whether  ever  that  council  (such  as  it  was)  would  have  been 
called,  if  some  provincial  and  national  synods  under  supreme 
and  regal  power  had  not  first  set  upon  this  great  work  of 
reformation ;  which  I  heartily  wish  had  in  all  places  been  as 
orderly  and  happily  pursued  as  the  work  was  right  Christian 
and  good  in  itself;  but  human  frailty,  and  the  heats  and 
distempers  of  men,  as  well  as  the  cunning  of  the  devil,  would 
not  suffer  that.  For  even  in  this  sense  also,  ^the  wrath  of 
man  doth  not  accomplish  the  will  of  God :  but  I  have  learned 
not  to  reject  the  good  which  God  hath  wrought  for  any  evil 
which  men  may  fasten  to  it. 

V. — And  yet  if  for  all  this  you  think  it  is  better  for  us  to 
be  blind  than  to  open  our  own  eyes,  let  me  tell  you,  very 
grave  and  learned  men,  and  of  your  own  party,  have  taught 

g  Rex  confitetur  se  vocasse  concilium  denegabat,    &c.    Concil.    Toletan.    ter- 

tertium  Toletanum  ;  quia  decursis  retro  tium,  can.  i. 
temporibus   haeresis   imminens   in  tota        h  James  i.  20. 
ecclesia  catholica  agere  synodica  negotia 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  24.  me,  that  when  the  universal  church  will  not,  or  for  the  iniqui- 
ties of  the  times  cannot,  obtain  and  settle  a  free  general 
council,  it  is  lawful,  nay,  sometimes  necessary,  to  reform 
gross  abuses  by  a  national  or  a  provincial :  for  besides  Alb. 
Magnus,  whom  I  quoted  'before,  Gerson,  the  learned  and 
devout  chancellor  of  Paris,  tells  us  plainly,  "  kThat  he  will 
not  deny  but  that  the  church  may  be  reformed  by  parts; 
and  that  this  is  necessary;  and  that  to  effect  it  provincial 
councils  may  suffice,  and  in  some  things  diocesan."  And 
again;  ul Either  you  should  reform  all  estates  of  the  church 
in  a  general  council,  or  command  them  to  be  reformed  in 
provincial  councils."  Now  Gerson  lived  about  two  hundred 
years  since.  But  this  right  of  provincial  synods,  that  they 
might  decree  in  causes  of  faith,  and  in  cases  of  reformation, 
where  corruptions  had  crept  into  the  sacraments  of  Christ, 
was  practised  much  above  a  thousand  years  ago  by  many 
both  national  and  provincial  synods.  For  the  m  council  at 
Rome  under  pope  Sylvester,  anno  324,  condemned  Photinus 
and  Sabellius ;  (and  their  heresies  were  of  high  nature  against 
the  faith.)  The  "council  at  Gangra  about  the  same  time 
condemned  Eustathius  for  his  condemning  of  marriage  as 
unlawful.  The  °  first  council  at  Carthage,  being  a  provincial, 
condemned  rebaptization,  much  about  the  year  348.  The 
P provincial  council  at  Aquileia,  in  the  year  381,  in  which 
St.  Ambrose  was  present,  condemned  Palladius  and  Secun- 
dinus  for  embracing  the  Arian  heresy.  The  <;  second  council 
of  Carthage  handled  and  decreed  the  belief  and  preaching  of 
the  Trinity;  and  this  a  little  after  the  year  424.  The  r coun- 
cil of  Milevis  in  Africa,  in  which  St.  Augustine  was  present, 
condemned  the  whole  course  of  the  heresy  of  Pelagius,  that 
great  and  bewitching  heresy,  in  the  year  416.  The  s  second 
council  at  Orange,  a  provincial  too,  handled  the  great  con- 

i  Sect.  24.  num.  II.  clesiasticorum,  par.  I.  pag.  209.  B. 

k  Nolo  tamen  dicere,  quiix  in  multis         m  Concil.  Rom.  2.  sub  Sylvestro. 
partibus  possit  ecclesia  per  suas  partes         n  Concil.  Gang.  can.  i. 
reformari.    Imo  hoc  necesse  esset,  sed         o  Concil.  Carth.  i.  can.  i. 
ad  hoc  agendum  sufficerent  concilia  pro-         P  Concil.  Aquiliens. 
vincialia,  &c.    Gerson.  Tract,  de  Gen.         q  Concil.  Carth.  2.  can.  i. 
Concil.   unius   obedientise,  par.  i.  pag.         r  Quaedam  de  causis  fidei,  unde  mine 

222«  F-  quaestio  Pelagian orum  irmninet,  in  hoc 

1  Omnes  ecclesiae  status  aut  in  gene-  co2tusanctissimoprimitustractentur,&c. 

rali  condlio  reformer's,  aut  in  conciliis  Aurel.  Carthaginensis  in  Pnefat.  Con- 

provincialibus  reformari  mandetis.  Ger-  cil.  Milevit.  apud  Caranzam. 
son.  Declarat.  Defectuum  Virorum  EC-         s  Concil.  Arausican.  2.  can.  1,2,  &c. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  127 

troversies  about  grace  and  freewill,  and  set  the  church  right  Sect. 
in  them,  in  the  year  444.  The  'third  council  at  Toledo  (a 
national  one),  in  the  year  589,  determined  many  things 
against  the  Arian  heresy,  about  the  very  prime  articles  of 
faith,  under  fourteen  several  anathemas.  The  fourth  council 
at  Toledo  did  not  only  handle  matters  of  faith  for  the  reform- 
ation of  that  people,  u  but  even  added  also  some  things  to  the 
Creed  which  were  not  expressly  delivered  in  former  creeds. 
Nay,  the  bishops  did  not  only  practise  this  to  condemn  here- 
sies in  national  and  provincial  synods,  and  so  reform  those 
several  places  and  the  church  itself  by  parts,  but  they  did 
openly  challenge  this  as  their  right  and  due,  and  that  without 
any  leave  asked  of  the  see  of  Rome  :  for  in  this  fourth 
council  of  Toledo  xthey  decree,  "That  if  there  happen  a 
cause  of  faith  to  be  settled,  a  general,  that  is,  a  national 
synod  of  all  Spain  and  Galicia  shall  be  held  thereon ;"  and 
this  in  the  year  643  :  where  you  see  it  was  then  catholic 
doctrine  in  all  Spain  that  a  national  synod  might  be  a  com- 
petent judge  in  a  cause  of  faith.  And  I  would  fain  know 
what  article  of  the  faith  doth  more  concern  all  Christians  in 
general  than  that  of  Filioque  ?  and  yet  the  church  of  Rome 
herself  made  that  addition  to  the  Creed  without  a  general 
council,  as  I  have  shewed  Y  already.  And  if  this  were  prac- 
tised so  often,  and  in  so  many  places,  why  may  not  a  national 
council  of  the  church  of  England  do  the  like  ? — as  she  did  : 
for  she  cast  off  the  pope's  usurpation,  and,  as  much  as  in 
her  lay,  restored  the  king  to  his  right.  That  appears  by  a 
z  book  subscribed  by  the  bishops  in  Henry  the  Eighth's  time, 
and  by  the  a records  in  the  archbishop's  office,  orderly  kept, 
and  to  be  seen.  In  the  reformation  which  came  after,  our 
b  princes  had  their  parts,  and  the  clergy  theirs  :  and  to  these 

t  Concil.  Tolet.  3.  z  The  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man; 

u  Quae  omnia  in  aliis  symbolis  expli-  printed  an.  1534. 

cite  tradita  non  suiit.   Concil.  Tolet.  4.  a   In    Synodo   Londinensi,    Sess.    8. 

can.  i.  Die  Veneris,  29  Januarii  an.  1562. 

x  Statuimus,  ut  saltern  semel  in  anno  b  And  so  in  the  reformation  under 

a  nobis  concilium  celebretur,  ita  tamen,  Hezekiah,  2  Chron.  xxix.,  and   under 

ut  si  fidei  causa  est,  aut  quselibet  alia  Josiah,  4  Reg.  xxiii.     And  in  the  time 

ecclesiae  cormnunis,  generalis  Hispaniae  of  Reccaredus  king  of  Spain  the  re- 

et    Galiciae     synodus     celebretur,    &c.  formation  there  proceeded  thus :  Quum 

Concil.  Tolet.  4.  can.  3.  gloriosissimus  princeps   omnes   regimi- 

7  Sect.  24.  num.  II.  nis    sui    pontifices    in    unum    conve- 

128  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  24.  two  principally  the  power  and  direction  for  reformation  be- 
longs. That  our  princes  had  their  parts,  is  manifest  by  their 
calling  together  of  the  bishops  and  others  of  the  clergy,  to 
consider  of  that  which  might  seem  worthy  reformation.  And 
the  clergy  did  their  part :  for  being  thus  called  together  by 
regal  power,  they  met  in  the  national  synod  of  sixty-two; 
and  the  articles  there  agreed  on  were  afterwards  confirmed 
by  acts  of  state  and  the  royal  assent.  In  this  synod  the 
positive  truths  which  are  delivered  are  more  than  the  pole- 
mics ;  so  that  a  mere  calumny  it  is,  that  we  profess  only  a 
negative  religion.  True  it  is,  and  we  must  thank  Rome  for 
it,  our  confession  must  needs  contain  some  negatives :  for  we 
cannot  but  deny  that  images  are  to  be  adored ;  nor  can  we 
admit  maimed  sacraments,  nor  grant  prayers  in  an  unknown 
tongue.  And  in  a  corrupt  time  or  place  it  is  as  necessary  in 
religion  to  deny  falsehood  as  to  assert  and  vindicate  truth  : 
indeed,  this  latter  can  hardly  be  well  and  sufficiently  done  but 
by  the  former ;  an  affirmative  verity  being  ever  included  in 
the  negative  to  a  falsehood.  As  for  any  error  which  might 
fall  into  this,  (as  any  other  reformation,)  if  any  such  can  be 
found,  then  I  say — and  it  is  most  true — reformation,  espe- 
cially in  cases  of  religion,  is  so  difficult  a  work,  and  subject 
to  so  many  pretensions,  that  it  is  almost  impossible  but  the 
reformers  should  step  too  far  or  fall  too  short  in  some  smaller 
things  or  other,  which,  in  regard  of  the  far  greater  benefit 
coming  by  the  reformation  itself,  may  well  be  passed  over  and 
borne  withal.  But  if  there  have  been  any  wilful  and  gross 
errors,  not  so  much  in  opinion  as  in  fact,  (c  sacrilege  too  often 
pretending  to  reform  superstition,)  that  is  the  crime  of  the 
reformers,  not  of  the  reformation ;  and  they  are  long  since 
gone  to  God  to  answer  it :  to  whom  I  leave  them. 

VI. — But  now  before  I  go  off  from  this  point  I  must  put 
you  in  remembrance  too  that  I  spake  at  that  time  (and  so 
must  all  that  will  speak  of  that  exigent)  of  the  general  church 

nire  raandasset,  &c.    Concil.  Tolet.  3.  reges  terrae  Christo  servientes  ad  emen- 

can.  i.— Cum  convenissemus  sacerdotes  dandam  vestram  impietatem  promulga- 

Dotnini  apud  urbem  Toletanam,  ut  re-  vemnt,  res  proprias  vestras  cupide  ap- 

giis  imperils  atque  jussis  commoniti,  &c.  petit,  displicet  nobis.     Quisquis  denique 

Concil.  Tolet.  4.  in  princ.  apud  Caran-  ipsas  res  pauperum,  vel  Basilicas  con- 

zam. — And  both  these  synods  did  treat  gregationum,  &c.  non  per  justitiam,  sed 

of  matters  of  faith.  per  avaritiam  tenet,  displicet  nobis.    S. 

c  Quisquis  occasione  hujus  legis,  quam  August.  Epist.  48.  versus  finem. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  129 

as  it  was  for  the  most  part  forced  under  the  government  of  Sect.  24,25. 
the  Roman  see :  and  this  you  understand  well  enough ;  for 
in  your  very  next  words  you  call  it  the  Roman  church.  Now 
I  make  no  doubt  but  that,  as  the  universal  catholic  church 
would  have  reformed  herself,  had  she  been  in  all  parts  freed 
of  the  Roman  yoke,  so,  while  she  was  for  the  most  in  these 
western  parts  under  that  yoke,  the  church  of  Rome  was,  if 
not  the  only,  yet  the  chief  hinderance  of  reformation.  And 
then  in  this  sense  it  is  more  than  clear,  that  if  the  Roman 
church  will  neither  reform  nor  suffer  reformation,  it  is  lawful 
for  any  other  particular  church  to  reform  itself,  so  long  as  it 
doth  it  peaceably  and  orderly,  and  keeps  itself  to  the  founda- 
tion and  free  from  d  sacrilege. 

$.  I  asked,  Quo  judice  did  this  appear  to  be  so  ?  which 
question  I  asked  as  not  thinking  it  equity  that  protest- 
ants  in  their  own  cause  should  be  accusers,  witnesses, 
and  judges  of  the  Roman  church. 

23.  I.- — You  do  well  to  tell  the  reason  now  why  you  asked  Sect.  25. 
this  question ;  for  you  did  not  discover  it  at  the  conference ; 
if  you  had,  you  might  then  have  received  your  answer.  It  is 
most  true,  no  man  in  common  equity  ought  to  be  suffered  to 
be  accuser,  witness,  and  judge  in  his  own  cause ;  but  is  there 
not  as  little  reason,  and  equity  too,  that  any  man  that  is  to  be 
accused  should  be  the  accused,  and  yet  witness  and  judge  in 
his  own  cause  ?  If  the  first  may  hold,  no  man  shall  be  inno- 
cent ;  and  if  the  last,  none  will  be  nocent.  And  what  do  we 
here  with  "  in  their  own  cause  against  the  Roman  church  T 
Why,  is  it  not  your  own  too  against  the  protestant  church  ? 
And  if  it  be  a  cause  common  to  both,  as  certain  it  is,  then 
neither  part  alone  may  be  judge  :  if  neither  alone  may  judge, 
then  either  they  must  be  judged  by  a  e third,  which  stands 
indifferent  to  both,  and  that  is  the  scripture,  or,  if  there  be 
a  jealousy  or  doubt  of  the  sense  of  the  scripture,  they  must 
either  both  repair  to  the  exposition  of  the  primitive  church, 
and  submit  to  that,  or  both  call  and  submit  to  a  general 

d  And  this  a  particular  church  may  grievousness  of  the  crime,  St.  Augustine 

do,  but  not  a  schism ;  for  a  schism  can  calls  it  sacrilegium  schismatis,  De  Bapt. 

never  be  peaceable  nor  orderly,  and  sel-  cont.   Donat.   lib.  i.   c.  8 ;    for  usually 

dom  free  from  sacrilege.     Out  of  which  they  go  together, 
respects,  (it  may  be,)  as  well  as  for  the         e  Sect.  21.  num.  IX. 

130  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  council,  which  shall  be  lawfully  called,  and  fairly  and  freely 
held  with  indifferency  to  all  parties,  and  that  must  judge  the 
difference  according  to  scripture,  which  must  be  their  rule  as 
well  as  private  menV 

A.  C.  p.  58.  II. — And  here,  after  some  loud  cry  against  the  pride  and 
insolent  madness  of  the  protestants,  A.  C.  adds,  "  That  the 
church  of  Rome  is  the  principal  and  mother-church ;  and  that 
therefore,  though  it  be  against  common  equity  that  subjects 
and  children  should  be  accusers,  witnesses,  judges,  and  execu- 
tioners against  their  prince  and  mother  in  any  case,  yet  it  is 
not  absurd  that  in  some  cases  the  prince  or  mother  may 
accuse,  witness,  judge,  and,  if  need  be,  execute  justice  against 
unjust  and  rebellious  subjects  or  evil  children.11  How  far 
forth  Rome  is  a  prince  over  the  whole  church,  or  a  mother  of 
it,  will  come  to  be  shewed  at  after.  In  the  mean  time, 
though  I  cannot  grant  her  to  be  either,  yet  let  us  suppose 
her  to  be  both,  that  A.  C.'s  argument  may  have  all  the 
strength  it  can  have :  nor  shall  it  force  me  (as  plausible  as  it 
seems)  to  weaken  the  just  power  of  princes  over  their  sub- 
jects, or  of  mothers  over  their  children,  to  avoid  the  shock  of 
this  argument :  for  though  A.  C.  may  tell  us  it  is  not  absurd 
in  some  cases,  yet  I  would  fain  have  him  name  any  one  mode- 
rate prince  that  ever  thought  it  just  or  took  it  upon  him  to 
be  accuser,  and  witness,  and  judge,  in  any  cause  of  moment 
against  his  subjects,  but  that  the  law  had  liberty  to  judge 
between  them.  For  the  great  philosopher  tells  us,  "  f  That 
the  chief  magistrate  is  custos  juris,  the  guardian  and  keeper 
of  the  law ;  and  if  of  the  law,  then  both  of  that  equity  and 
equality  which  is  due  unto  them  that  are  under  him."  And 
even  Tiberius  himself,  in  the  cause  of  Silanus,  when  Dolabella 
would  have  flattered  him  into  more  power  than  in  wisdom  he 
thought  fit  then  to  take  to  himself,  he  put  him  off  thus :  No, 
"sthe  laws  grow  less  where  such  power  enlarges;  nor  is 
absolute  power  to  be  used  where  there  may  be  an  orderly 
proceeding  by  law."  And  for  h  parents,  it  is  true,  when  chil- 
dren are  young  they  may  chastise  them  without  other  accuser 
or  witness  than  themselves,  and  yet  the  children  are  to  give 

f  "Eari  8e  6  &pxuv  <f>uAo|  rov  SiKalov  nee  utendum  imperio,  uhi  legibus  agi 

ft  5*  rov  SiKalov,  KOI  rov  foov.    Arist.  possit.   Tacit.  Ann.  lib.  iii. 

Eth.  c.  6.  h  Heb.  xii.  9. 

£  Minui  jura  quoties  gliscat  potestas, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  131 

them  reverence :  and  it  is  presumed  that  natural  affection  Sect.  25. 
will  prevail  so  far  with  them  that  they  will  not  punish  them 
too  much ;  for  all  experience  tells  us  (almost  to  the  loss  of 
education)  they  'punish  them  too  little,  even  when  there  is 
cause :  yet  when  children  are  grown  up  and  come  to  some 
full  use  of  their  own  reason,  the  apostle's  rule  is,  kColos.  iii. 
Parents,  provoke  not  your  children ;  and  if  the  apostle  prevail 
not  with  froward  parents,  there  is  a  magistrate  and  a  law 
to  relieve  even  a  son  against  ]  unnatural  parents :  as  it  was 
in  the  case  of  T.  Manlius  against  his  over-imperious  father. 
And  an  express  law  there  was  among  the  Jewsm  when  chil- 
dren were  grown  up  and  fell  into  great  extremities,  that  the 
parents  should  then  bring  them  to  the  magistrate,  and  not 
be  too  busy  in  such  cases  with  their  own  power.  So  suppose 
Rome  be  a  prince,  yet  her  subjects  must  be  tried  by  God's 
law  the  scripture ;  and  suppose  her  a  mother,  yet  there  is 
or  ought  to  be  remedy  against  her  for  her  children  that  are 
grown  up,  if  she  forget  all  good  nature  and  turn  stepdame  to 

III. — Well ;  the  reason  why  the  Jesuit  asked  the  ques- 
tion, Quo  judice  ?  who  should  be  judge  ?  he  says,  was  this ; 
because  there  is  no  equity  in  it  that  the  protestants  should 
be  judges  in  their  own  cause.  But  now  upon  more  delibera- 
tion A.  C.  tells  us,  (as  if  he  knew  the  Jesuit's  mind  as  well  as  A.  C.  p.  57. 
himself,  as  sure  I  think  he  doth,)  "  That  the  Jesuit  directed 
this  question  chiefly  against  that  speech  of  mine,  that  there 
were  errors  in  doctrine  of  faith,  and  that  in  the  general 
church,  as  the  Jesuit  understood  my  meaning.11  The  Jesuit 
here  took  my  meaning  right ;  for  I  confess  I  said  there 
were  errors  in  doctrine,  and  dangerous  ones  too,  in  the  church 
of  Rome :  I  said  likewise,  that  when  the  general  church  could 
not  or  would  not  reform  such,  it  was  lawful  for  particular 
churches  to  reform  themselves.  But  then  I  added,  "  That 

i  God  used   Samuel  as  a  messenger  k  Colos.  iii.  21. 

against   Eli   for   his   overmuch    indul-  1  Crimini    ei   tribunus    inter   castera 

gence  to  his  sons,  i  Sam.  iii.  13  ;  and  dabat,  quod  filium  juvenem  nullius  pro- 

yet  Samuel  himself  committed  the  very  bri  compertum,  extorrem  urbe,  domo, 

same  fault   concerning  his   own   sons,  penatibus,  foro,  luce,  congressu  aequa- 

i  Sam.  viii.  3,  5.     And  this  indulgence  lium  prohibitum,  in  opus  servile,  prope 

occasioned  the  change  of  the  civil  go-  in  carcerem,  atque  in   ergastulurn   de- 

vernment,  as  the  former  was  the  loss  derit.     Liv.  dec.  i.  1.  7. 

of  the  priesthood.  m  Deut.  xxi.  19. 



Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  the  general  church  (not  universally  taken,  but  in  these  western 
parts)  fell  into  those  errors,  being  swayed  in  these  latter  ages 
by  the  predominant  power  of  the  church  of  Rome,  under 
whose  government  it  was  for  the  most  part  forced."  And 
all  men  of  understanding  know  how  oft  and  how  easily  an 
overpotent  member  carries  the  whole  with  it  in  any  body, 
natural,  politic,  or  ecclesiastical. 

A.  c.  p.  5 7.  IV. — Yea,  but  A.  0.  tells  us,  "  That  never  any  competent 
judge  did  so  censure  the  church,  and  indeed  that  no  power 
on  earth  or  in  hell  itself  can  so  far  prevail  against  the  general 
church  as  to  make  it  err  generally  in  any  one  point  of  divine 
truth,  and  much  less  to  teach  any  thing  by  its  full  authority 
to  be  a  matter  of  faith  which  is  contrary  to  divine  truth 
expressed  or  involved  in  scriptures  rightly  understood  ;  and 
that  therefore  no  reformation  of  faith  can  be  needful  in  the 
general  church,  but  only  in  particular  churches."  And  for 
proof  of  this  he  cites  St.  Matt.  xvi.  and  xxviii.,  St.  Luke  xxii., 
St.  John  xiv.  and  xvi.  In  this  troublesome  and  quarrelling 
age  I  am  most  unwilling  to  meddle  with  the  erring  of  the 
church  in  general ;  the  church  of  England  is  content  to  pass 
that  over ;  and  though  "she  tells  us  that  the  church  of  Rome 
hath  erred  even  in  matters  of  faith,  yet  of  the  erring  of  the 
church  in  general  she  is  modestly  silent.  But  since  A.  C. 
will  needs  have  it  that  the  whole  church  did  never  generally 
err  in  any  one  point  of  faith,  he  should  do  well  to  distinguish 
before  he  be  so  peremptory :  for  if  he  mean  no  more  than 
that  the  whole  universal  church  of  Christ  cannot  universally 
err  in  any  one  point  of  faith  simply  necessary  to  all  men^s 
salvation,  he  fights  against  no  adversary,  that  I  know,  but 
his  own  fiction  ;  for  the  most  ° learned  protestants  grant  it: 
but  if  he  mean  that  the  whole  church  cannot  err  in  any  one 
point  of  divine  truth  in  general,  which,  though  by  sundry 
consequences  deduced  from  the  principles,  is  yet  made  a  point 
of  faith,  and  may  prove  dangerous  to  the  salvation  of  some 
which  believe  it  and  practise  after  it,  (as  his  words  seem  to 
import,)  especially  if  in  these  the  church  shall  presume  to 

n  Art.  XIX.  Spiritu    Sancto   doceri    se   per   verbum 

o  Si  demus  en-are  non   posse  eccle-  Dei  patitur.     Calvin.  Inst.  lib.  iv.  c.  8. 

siam  in   rebus  ad   salutem   necessariis,  §.  13.    And  this  also  is  our  sense.  Vide 

bic  sensus  noster  est :  Ideo   hoc  esse,  sup.  §.  21.  num.  V. 
quia    abdicata    omni    sua    sapientia,    a 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  138 

determine  without  her  proper  guide,  the  scripture,  as  P Bel- Sect.  25. 
larmine  says  she  may  and  yet  not  err ;  then  perhaps  it  may 
be  said,  and  without  any  wrong  to  the  catholic  church,  that 
the  whole  militant  church  hath  erred  in  such  a  point  of  divine 
truth  and  of  faith :  nay,  A.  C.  confesses  expressly  in  his  very  A.  C.  p.  58. 
next  words,  "  That  the  whole  church  may  at  some  time  not 
know  all  divine  truths,  which  afterwards  it  may  learn  by 
study  of  scripture  and  otherwise."  So  then  in  A.  C.'s  judg- 
ment the  whole  militant  church  may  at  some  time  not  know 
all  divine  truths.  Now  that  which  knows  not  all  must  be 
ignorant  of  some,  and  that  which  is  ignorant  of  some  may 
possibly  err  in  one  point  or  other :  the  rather,  because  he 
confesses  the  knowledge  of  it  must  be  got  by  learning ;  and 
learners  may  mistake  and  err,  especially  where  the  lesson  is 
divine  truth  out  of  scripture,  out  of  difficult  scripture:  for 
were  it  of  plain  and  easy  scripture  that  he  speaks,  the  whole 
church  could  not  at  any  time  be  without  the  knowledge  of  it ; 
and  for  aught  I  yet  see,  the  whole  church  militant  hath  no 
greater  warrant  against  not  erring  in  than  against  not  know- 
ing of  the  points  of  divine  truth;  for  in  ^St.  John  xvi. 
there  is  as  large  a  promise  to  the  church  of  knowing  all 
points  of  divine  truth,  as  A.  C.  or  any  Jesuit  j3an  produce 
for  her  not  erring  in  any;  and  if  she  may  be  ignorant  or 
mistaken  in  learning  of  any  point  of  divine  truth,  doubtless 
in  that  state  of  ignorance  she  may  both  err  and  teach  her 
error,  yea,  and  teach  that  to  be  divine  truth  which  is  not ; 
nay,  perhaps  teach  that  as  a  matter  of  divine  truth  which  is 
contrary  to  divine  truth,  always  provided  it  be  not  in,  any 
point  simply  fundamental,  of  which  the  whole  catholic  church 
cannot  be  ignorant,  and  in  which  it  cannot  err,  as  hath 
before  been  proved. r 

V. — As  for  the  places  of  scripture  which  A.  C.   cites  to  A.  C.  p.  57. 
prove  that  the  whole   church   cannot  err   generally  in  any 
one  point   of  divine  truth,  be   it  fundamental  or  not,  they 
are  known   places   all   of  them,   and   are   alleged  by   A.  C.  A.C.  p.  57. 
three  several  times  in  this  short  tract  and  to  three  several 

P  Nostra  sententia  est,  ecclesiam  ab-  sive  non.    Bellarm.  de  Eccl.  Milit.  lib. 

solute  non  posse  errare,  nee  in  rebus  iii.  c.  14.  §.  5. 
absolute   necessariis,  nee  in    aliis  quse         n  John  xvi.  13. 
credenda  vel   facienda  nobis   proponit,         r  Sect.  21.  num.  V. 
sive  habeantur  expresse   in    scripturis, 

134  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  purposes ;  here,  to  prove  that  the  universal  church  cannot 
A.C.  p.  5  3.  err;  before  this,  to  prove  that  the  tradition  of  the  present 
church  cannot  err ;  after  this,  to  prove  that  the  pope  cannot 
A.  c.  p.  58.  err.  He  should  have  done  well  to  have  added  these  places  a 
and  73-  fourth  time  to  prove  that  general  councils  cannot  err  ;  for  so 
doth  both  sStapleton  and  tBellarmine.  Sure  A.  C.  and  his 
fellows  are  hard  driven  when  they  must  fly  to  the  same  places 
for  such  different  purposes ;  for  a  pope  may  err  where  a 
council  doth  not,  and  a  general  council  may  err  where  the 
catholic  church  cannot ;  and  therefore  it  is  not  likely  that 
these  places  should  serve  alike  for  all.  The  first  place  is» 
St.  Matthew  xvi. ; u  there  Christ  told  St.  Peter,  and  we 
believe  it  most  assuredly,  that  hell-gates  shall  never  be  able  to 
prevail  against  his  church;  but  that  is,  that  they  shall  not 
prevail  to  make  the  church  catholic  apostatize  and  fall  quite 
away  from  Christ,  or  err  in  absolute  fundamentals,  which 
amounts  to  as  much.  But  the  promise  reaches  not  to  this, 
that  the  church  shall  never  err,  no,  not  in  the  lightest  matters 
of  faith:  for  it  will  not  follow,  hell-gates  shall  not  prevail 
against  the  church,  therefore  hellish  devils  shall  not  tempt 
or  assault  and  batter  it.  And  thus  St.  Augustine x  under- 
stood the  plafce  :  "  It  may  fight,  (yea  and  be  wounded  too,)  but 
it  cannot  be  wholly  overcome."  And  Bellarmine  himself  ap- 
plies it  to  prove  ythat  the  visible  church  of  Christ  cannot 
deficere,  err  so  as  quite  to  fall  away.  Therefore  in  his  judg- 
ment this  is  a  true  and  a  safe  sense  of  this  text  of  scripture. 
But  as  for  not  erring  at  all  in  any  point  of  divine  truth,  and 
so  making  the  church  absolutely  infallible,  that  is  neither 
a  true  nor  a  safe  sense  of  this  scripture.  And  it  is  very 
remarkable,  that  whereas  this  text  hath  been  so  much  beaten 
upon  by  writers  of  all  sorts,  there  is  no  one  Father  of  the 
church  for  twelve  hundred  years  after  Christ  (the  counterfeit 
or  partial  decretals  of  some  popes  excepted)  that  ever  con- 
cluded the  infallibility  of  the  church  out  of  this  place  ;  but  her 
non-deficiency,  that  hath  been  and  is  justly  deduced  hence : 
and  here  I  challenge  A.  C.  and  all  that  party  to  shew  the 

s  Stapl.  Relect.  pnef.  ad  lectorem.  est.   S.  August.  L.  <le  Symb.  ad  Cate- 

t  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  2.  cum.  c.  6. 

n  Matt.  xvi.  1 8.  y  Bellarm.   de  Eccl.   Milit.  lib.   iii. 

x  Pugnare  potest,  expugnari  nori  pot-  c.  13.  §.  i.  &c. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  135 

contrary  if  they  can.  The  next  place  of  scripture  is  z  St.  Sect.  25. 
Matthew  xxviii.,  the  promise  of  Christ  that  he  will  be  with 
them  to  the  end  of  the  world.  But  this,  in  the  general  voice  of  the 
Fathers a  of  the  church,  is  a  promise  of  assistance  and  pro- 
tection, not  of  an  infallibility  of  the  church.  And  bpope  Leo 
himself  enlarges  this  presence  and  providence  of  Christ  to  all 
those  things  which  he  committed  to  the  execution  of  his 
ministers ;  but  no  word  of  infallibility  is  to  be  found  there  : 
and  indeed  since  Christ,  according  to  his  promise,  is  present 
with  his  ministers  in  all  these  things,  and  that  one  and  a 
chief  of  these  all  is  the  preaching  of  his  word  to  the  people ; 
it  must  follow  that  Christ  should  be  present  with  all  his 
ministers  that  preach  his  word  to  make  them  infallible,  which 
daily  experience  tells  us  is  not  so.  The  third  place  urged  by 
A.  C.  is  cSt.  Luke  xxii.,  where  the  prayer  of  Christ  will  effect 
no  more  than  his  promise  hath  performed ;  neither  of  them 
implying  an  infallibility  for  or  in  the  church  against  all  errors 
whatsoever.  And  this  almost  all  his  own  side  confess  is 
spoken  either  of  St.  Peter's  person  only,  or  of  him  and  his 
successors  dboth.  Of  the  church  it  is  not  spoken,  and  there- 
fore cannot  prove  an  unerring  power  in  it :  for  how  can  that 
place  prove  the  church  cannot  err  which  speaks  not  at  all  of 
the  church  ?  And  it  is  observable  too,  that  when  the  divines 
of  Paris  expounded  this  place  that  Christ  here  prayed  for  St. 
Peter  as  he  represented  the  whole  catholic  church,  and  ob- 
tained for  it  that  the  faith  of  the  catholic  church  nunquam 
deficeret,  should  never  so  err  as  quite  to  fall  away,  Cellar- 
mine  is  so  stiff  for  the  pope  that  he  says  expressly,  "  This  ex- 
position of  the  Parisians  is  false/'  and  that  this  text  cannot  be 
meant  of  the  catholic  church.  Not  be  meant  of  it !  then 
certainly  it  ought  not  to  be  alleged  as  proof  of  it,  as  here  it 
is  by  A.  C.  The  fourth  place  named  by  A.  C.  is  f  St.  John  A.  c  p.  57. 

z  Matt,  xxviii.  21.  place  of  both   St.  Peter   and   his   suc- 

a  S.  Hil.  in  Psal.  cxxiv — Prosp.  deVo-  cessors. 

cat.  Gent.  lib.  ii.  c.  2. — Leo,  Serm.  2.  de         e  Quse  expositio  falsa  est,  primo  quia, 

Resur.  Dom.  c.  3.  et  Ep.  31. — Isidor.  in  &c.    BelJarm.  ibid.  §.  2.     And  he  says 

Jos.  12.  it   is    false,   because  the   Parisians   ex- 

b  In  omnibus  quae  ministris  suis  com-  pounded  it  of  the  church  only  :  Volunt 

misit  exequenda.  S.  Leo,  Epist.  91.  c.  2.  enim  pro  sola  ecclesia  esse  oratum.  Ibid. 

c  Luke  xxii.  32.  §.  i. 

d  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  3.         f  John  xiv.  16,  17. 
§.  Est  igitur  tertia.     He  understood  the 

K  4 

136  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  xiv.,  and  the  consequent  place  to  it,  sSt.  John  xvi.  These 
places  contain  another  promise  of  Christ  concerning  the 
coming  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Thus :  That  the  Comforter  shall 
abide  with  them  for  ever :  that  this  Comforter  is  the  Spirit  of 
truth  ;  and  that  this  Spirit  of  truth  will  lead  them  into  all  truth. 
Now  this  promise,  as  it  is  applied  to  the  church  consisting  of 
all  believers  which  are  and  have  been  since  Christ  appeared 
in  the  flesh,  including  the  apostles,  is  h  absolute  and  without 
any  restriction ;  for  the  Holy  Ghost  did  lead  them  into  all 
truth,  so  that  no  error  was  to  be  found  in  that  church ;  but, 
as  it  is  appliable  to  the  whole  church  militant  in  all  succeed- 
ing times,  so  the  promise  was  made  with  a  limitation,  '  namely, 
that  the  blessed  Spirit  should  abide  with  the  church  for  ever 
and  lead  it  into  all  truth ;  but  not  simply  into  all  curious 
truth,  no  not  in  or  about  the  faith,  but  into  all  truth  neces- 
sary to  salvation :  and  against  this  truth  the  whole  catholic 
church  cannot  err,  keeping  herself  to  the  direction  of  the 
scripture  as  Christ  hath  appointed  her ;  for  in  this  very  place 
where  the  promise  is  made,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  teach 
you  all  things,  it  is  added,  that  he  shall  bring  all  things  to  their 
remembrance.  What !  simply  all  things  ?  No,  but  all  things 
which  Christ  had  told  them,  k St. .John  xiv.;  so  there  is  a 
limitation  put  upon  the  words  by  Christ  himself :  and  if  the 
church  will  not  err,  it  must  not  ravel  curiously  into  unneces- 
sary truths  which  are  out  of  the  promise,  nor  follow  any  other 
guide  than  the  doctrine  which  Christ  hath  left  behind  him 
to  govern  it :  for  if  it  will  come  to  the  end,  it  must  keep  in 
the  way.  And  Christ,  who  promised  the  Spirit  should  lead, 
/  hath  nowhere  promised  that  it  shall  followjiajeader  into  all 
truth ;  and  at  least  not  infallibly,  unless  you  will  limit  as 
before :  so  no  one  of  these  places  can  make  good  A.  C.'s 
assertion,  "  That  the  whole  church  cannot  err  generally  in 
any  one  point  of  divine  truth ;"  in  absolute  foundations  ]she 
cannot,  in  deductions  and  superstructures  she  may. 

g  John  xvi.  13.  mirabiles  apostoli  omnia  praesciverunt. 

h  Field,  de  Eccles.  lib.  iv.  c.  2,  free  Quaecunque  enim  expediebant,  ea  illis 

from  all  error  and  ignorance  of  divine  significavit  gratia  Spiritus.     Theod.  in 

things,  i  Tim.  iii.  14,  15. 
i  And  Theodoret  proceeds  further,  and         k  John  xiv.  26. 
says,    Neque    divini    prophet*,    neque         1  Sect.  21.  num.  V. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  137 

VI. — Now  to  all  that  I  have  said   concerning  the  right  Sect.  25. 
which  particular  churches  have  to  reform  themselves  when 
the  general  church  cannot  for  impediments,  or  will  not  for 
negligence,  which   I  have  proved  at  large  m  before,  all   the 
answer  that  A.  C.  gives  is,  first,   Quo  judice?  who  shall  beA.C.  p.  57. 
judge? — And  that  shall  be  the  scripture  and  the  "primitive 
church ;  and  by  the  rules  of  the  one,  and  to  the  integrity  of 
the  other,  both  in  faith  and  manners,  any  particular  church 
may  safely  reform  itself. 

VII. — Secondly,  "  That  no  reformation  in  faith  can  be 
needful  in  the  general  church,  but  only  in  particular  churches. 
In  which  case  also  (he  saith)  particular  churches  may  not  A.  C.  p.  58. 
take  upon  them  to  judge  and  condemn  others  of  errors  in 
faith."  Well,  how  far  forth  reformation  even  of  faith  may 
be  necessary  in  the  general  church,  I  have  expressed  °  already  : 
and  for  particular  churches,  I  do  not  say  that  they  must  take 
upon  them  to  judge  or  condemn  others  of  error  in  faith ; 
that  which  I  say  is,  they  may  reform  themselves.  Now  I 
hope  to  reform  themselves  and  to  condemn  others  are  two 
different  works,  unless  it  fall  out  so  that  by  reforming  them- 
selves they  do  by  consequence  condemn  any  other  that  is 
guilty  in  that  point  in  which  they  reform  themselves ;  and  so 
far  to  judge  and  condemn  others  is  not  only  lawful  but  neces- 
sary. A  man  that  lives  religiously  doth  not  by  and  by  sit  in 
judgment  and  condemn  with  his  mouth  all  profane  livers ; 
but  yet  while  he  is  silent  his  very  life  condemns  them :  and  I 
hope  in  this  way  of  judicature  A.  C.  dares  not  say  it  is  un- 
lawful for  a  particular  church  or  man  to  condemn  another ; 
and  further,  whatsoever  A.  C.  can  say  to  the  contrary,  there 
are  divers  cases,  where  heresies  are  known  and  notorious,  in 
which  it  will  be  hard  to  say  (as  he  doth)  that  one  particular  A.  C.  p.  58. 
church  must  not  judge  or  condemn  another,  so  far  forth  at 
least  as  to  abhor  and  protest  against  the  heresy  of  it. 

VIII. — Thirdly,  if  one  particular  church  may  not  judge  or 
condemn  another,  what  must  then  be  done  where  particulars 

m  Sect.  24.  num.  I.  II.  &c.  dum  est  ?     Quid  autem  si  neque  apo- 

n  Si  de  modica  qupestione  disceptatio  stoli  quidem  scripturas  reliquissent  nobis, 

esset,  nonne  oporteret  in  antiquissimas  nonne   oportebat   ordinem   sequi  tradi- 

recurrere   ecclesias,  in    quibus   apostoli  tionis,  &c.    Irenseus  advers.  Haeres.  lib. 

conversati  sunt,  et  ab  iis  de  pfsesenti  viii.  c.  4. 

quaestione  sumere  quod  certum  et  liqui-         o  Sect.  25.  num.  IV. 

138  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  need  reformation?  What!  why  then  A.  C.  tells  us,  "That 
A.  C.  p.  58.  particular  churches  must  in  that  case  (as  Irenseus  intimateth) 
have  recourse  to  the  church  of  Rome,  which  hath  more  power- 
ful principality,  and  to  Pher  bishop,  who  is  chief  pastor  of  the 
whole  church,  as  being  St.  Peter's  successor,  to  whom  Christ 
promised  the  keys,  St.  Matt,  xvi.,  for  whom  he  prayed  that 
his  faith  might  not  fail,  St.  Luke  xxii.,  and  whom  he  charged 
to  feed  and  govern  the  whole  flock,  St.  John  xxi.  And  this 
(A.  C.  tells  us)  he  shall  never  refuse  to  do  in  such  sort  as 
that  this  neglect  shall  be  a  just  cause  for  any  particular 
man  or  church,  under  pretence  of  reformation  in  manners 
or  faith,  to  make  a  schism  or  separation  from  the  whole 
general  church." 

IX. — Well,  first,  you  see  where  A.  C.  would  have  us :  "If 
any  particular  churches  differ  in  points  of  divine  truth,  they 
must  not  judge  or  condemn  each  other,"  saith  he.  No,  take 
heed  of  that  in  any  case ;  that  is  the  office  of  the  universal 
church.  And  yet  he  will  have  it  that  Rome,  which  is  but  a 
particular  church,  must  and  ought  to  judge  all  other  parti- 

X. — Secondly,  he  tells  us  this  is  so,  "  because  the  church  of 
Rome  hath  more  powerful  principality  than  other  particular 
churches,  and  that  her  bishop  is  pastor  of  the  whole  church." 
To  this  I  answer,  that  it  is  most  true  indeed,  the  church  of 
Rome  hath  had,  and  hath  yet,  more  powerful  principality 
than  any  other  particular  church,  but  she  hath  not  this  power 
from  Christ :  the  Roman  patriarch,  by  ecclesiastical  consti- 
tutions, might,  perhaps,  have  a  primacy  of  order;  but  for 
principality  of  power,  the  patriarchs  were  as  even,  as  equal, 
as  the  9 apostles  were  before  them.  The  truth  is,  this  "more 

P  And  after  he  saith,  p.  58,  "  That  aliis  vero  tanquam  delegatis,  quibus  non 

the  bishop  of  Rome  is  and  ought  to  be  succederetur.  This  is  handsomely  said 

the  judge  of  particular  churches  in  this  to  men  easy  of  belief:  but  that  the 

case."  highest  power  ecclesiastical,  confessed  to 

q  Summa  potestas  ecclesiastica  non  be  given  to  the  other  apostles  as  well 

est  data  solum  Petro,  sed  etiam  aliis  as  to  St.  Peter,  was  given  to  St.  Peter 

apostolis.  Omnes  enim  poterant  dicere  only,  as  to  an  ordinary  pastor,  whose 

ilhid  S.  Pauli,  sollidtudo  omnium  eccle-  successors  should  have  the  same  power, 

siarum,  Qc.  2  Cor.  xi.  28.  Bellarm.  de  which  the  successors  of  the  rest  should 

Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  c.  9.  §.  Respondeo  not  have,  can  never  be  proved  out  of 

pontificatum — Where  then  is  the  dif-  scripture;  nay,  (I  will  give  them  their 

ference  between  St.  Peter  and  the  rest  ?  own  latitude.")  it  can  never  be  proved 

In  this,  saith  Bellarmine,  ibid.,  Quia  by  any  tradition  of  the  whole  catholic 

haec  potestas  data  est  Petro,  ut  ordina-  church :  and  till  it  be  proved,  Bellar- 

rio  pastori,  cui  perpetuo  succederetur ;  mine's  handsome  expression  cannot  be 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

powerful  principality"  the  Roman  bishops  r  got  under  the  Sect.  25. 
emperors  after  they  became  Christians;  and  they  used  the 
matter  so  that  they  grew  big  enough  to  oppose,  nay,  to 
depose  the  emperors,  by  the  same  power  which  they  had 
given  them.  And  after  this,  other  particular  churches,  espe- 
cially here  in  the  west,  submitted  themselves  to  them  for 
succour  and  protection's  sake.  And  this  was  one  main  cause 
which  swelled  Rome  into  this  more  powerful  principality,  and 
not  any  right  given  by  Christ  to  make  that  s  prelate  pastor 
of  the  whole  church.  I  know  Bellarmine  makes  much  ado 
about  it,  and  will  needs  fetch  it  out  of  l St.  Augustine,  who 
says  indeed  that  "  in  the  church  of  Rome  there  did  always 
flourish  the  principality  of  an  apostolic  chair ;"  or,  if  you 
will,  the  apostolic  chair  in  relation  to  the  west  and  south 
parts  of  the  church,  all  the  other  four  apostolic  chairs  being 
in  the  east.  Now  this  no  man  denies  that  understands  the 
state  and  story  of  the  church ;  and  u  Calvin  confesses  it  ex- 
pressly :  nor  is  the  word  principatus  so  great,  nor  were  the 
bishops  of  those  times  so  little,  as  that  principes  and  princi- 
patus are  not  commonly  given  them  both  by  the  x  Greek  and 
the  Latin  Fathers  of  this  great  and  learnedest  age  of  the 
church,  made  up  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  hundred  years; 
always  understanding  principatus  of  their  spiritual  power,  and 
within  the  limits  of  their  several  jurisdictions,  which  perhaps 
now  and  then  they  did  occasionally  exceed.  And  there  is 
not  one  word  in  St.  Augustine,  That  this  principality  of  the 
apostolic  chair  in  the  church  of  Rome  was  then,  or  ought  to 
be  now,  exercised  over  the  whole  church  of  Christ,  as  Bellar- 

believed  by  me ;  for  St.  Cyprian  hath  bishop  in  general,  Greg.  Nazianz.  Orat. 

told  me  long  since  that  episcopatus  unus  1 7.  Ascribuntur  episcopo  Swrjo-re/o,  £?}- 

est  (for  as  much  as  belongs  to  the  call-  /ia,  KOI  ctpx^j  imperium,  thronus,  et 

ing)  as  well  as  apostolatus.  Lib.  de  principatus  ad  regimen  animal-urn.  Et 

simp.  Praelato.  TOJOUTTJ  apx'n,  hujusmodi  imperium — 

r  Sect.  25.  num.  XII.  And  he  also  speaks  of  a  bishop,  Greg. 

s  De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  c.  9.  §.  An-  Nazianz.  Orat.  20.  Nor  were  these 

gustinus  epistola.  any  titles  of  pride  in  bishops  then ;  for 

t  Epist.  162.  In  Romana  ecclesia  sem-  St.  Greg.  Nazianzen,  who  challenges 

per  apostolicae  cathedrae  viguit  princi-  these  titles  to  himself,  Orat.  1 7,  was  so 

patus.  devout,  so  mild,  and  so  humble,  that 

u  Quia  opinio  invaluit  fundatam  esse  rather  than  the  peace  of  the  church 

hanc  ecclesiam  a  S.  Petro ;  itaque  in  should  be  broken,  he  freely  resigned  the 

occidente  sedes  apostolica  honoris  causa  great  patriarchate  of  Constantinople,  and 

vocabatur.  Calv.  lib.  iv.  c.  6.  §.  16.  retired;  and  this  in  the  first  council 

x  Princeps  ecclesiae,  S.  Hilar.  de  Trin.  of  Constantinople,  and  the  second  ge- 

lib.  viii.  princ.  And  he  speaks  of  a  neraL 

140  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  mine  insinuates  there,  and  as  A.  C.  would  have  it  here.  And 
to  prove  that  St.  Augustine  did  not  intend  by  principatus 
here  to  give  the  Roman  bishop  any  power  out  of  his  own 
limits,  (which,  God  knows,  were  far  short  of  the  whole  church,) 
I  shall  make  it  most  manifest  out  of  the  very  same  epistle. 
For  afterwards,  saith  St.  Augustine,  when  the  pertinacy  of 
the  Donatists  could  not  be  restrained  by  the  African  bishops 
only,  "  y  they  gave  them  leave  to  be  heard  by  foreign  bishops." 
And  after  that  he  hath  these  words :  "  z  And  yet  perad ven- 
ture Melciades,  the  bishop  of  the  Roman  church,  with  his 
colleagues  the  transmarine  bishops,  non  debuit,  ought  not  to 
usurp  to  himself  this  judgment,  which  was  determined  by 
seventy  African  bishops,  Tigisitanus  sitting  primate.  And 
what  will  you  say  if  he  did  not  usurp  this  power?  for  the 
emperor  being  desired  sent  bishops  judges,  which  should  sit 
with  him  and  determine  what  was  just  upon  the  whole  cause." 
In  which  passage  there  are  very  many  things  observable. 
As,  first,  that  the  Roman  prelate  came  not  in  till  there  was 
leave  for  them  to  go  to  transmarine  bishops.  Secondly,  that 
if  the  pope  had  come  in  without  this  leave,  it  had  been  an 
usurpation.  Thirdly,  that  when  he  did  thus  come  in,  not  by 
his  own  proper  authority,  but  by  leave,  there  were  other 
bishops  made  judges  with  him.  Fourthly,  that  these  other 
bishops  were  appointed  and  sent  by  the  emperor  and  his 
power ; — that  which  the  pope  will  least  of  all  endure.  Lastly, 
lest  the  pope  and  his  adherents  should  say  this  was  an  usur- 
pation in  the  emperor,  aSt.  Augustine  tells  us  a  little  before, 
in  the  same  epistle  still,  that  "this  doth  chiefly  belong  ad 
curam  ejus,  to  the  emperor's  care  and  charge,  and  that  he 
is  to  give  an  account  to  God  for  it."  And  Melciades  did  sit 
and  judge  the  business  with  all  Christian  prudence  and  mode- 
ration. So  at  this  time  the  Roman  prelate  was  not  received 
as  pastor  of  the  whole  church,  say  A.  C.  what  he  please  :  nor 
had  he  any  supremacy  over  the  other  patriarchs:  and  for 

y  Pergant  ad  fratres  et  collegas  nos-  fuerit  terminatum  ?  Quid  quod  nee  ipse 

tros   transmarinarum   ecclesiarum   epi-  usurpavit :    rogatus   quippe   imperator, 

scopes,  &c.    S.  August.  Ep.  1 62.  judices  misit  episcopos,  qui  cum  eo  sede- 

z  An  forte  non  debuit  Romanae  eccle-  rent,  et  de  tota  ilia  causa,  quod  justum 

siae    Melciades   episcopus    cum   collegis  videretur,  statuerent,  &c.  S.  Aug.  ibid, 
transmarinis  episcopis   illud  sibi  usur-         a  Ad  cujus  curam,  de  qua  rationem 

pare  judicium  quod  ab  Afris   septua-  Deo  redditurus  est,  res  ilia  maxiine  per- 

ginta,  ubi  primas  Tigisitanus  praesedit,  tinebat.    S.  August.  Ep.  162. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  141 

this,  were  all  other  records  of  antiquity  silent,  the  civil  law  Sect.  -25. 
is  proof  enough,  (and  that  is  a  monument  of  the  primitive 
church.)  The  text  there  is,  bA  patriarcha  non  datur  appel- 
latio,  "  from  a  patriarch  there  lies  no  appeal."  No  appeal — 
therefore  every  patriarch  was  alike  supreme  in  his  own 
patriarchate ;  therefore  the  pope  then  had  no  supremacy 
over  the  whole  church ;  therefore  certainly  not  then  received 
as  universal  pastor.  And  St.  Gregory  himself,  speaking  of 
appeals,  and  expressly  citing  the  laws  themselves,  says  plainly, 
"  c  That  the  patriarch  is  to  put  a  final  end  to  those  causes 
which  come  before  him  by  appeal  from  bishops  and  arch- 
bishops :"  but  then  he  adds,  " d  That  where  there  is  nor 
metropolitan  nor  patriarch  of  that  diocess,  there  they  are  to 
have  recourse  to  the  see  apostolic,  as  being  the  head  of  all 
churches."  Where,  first,  this  implies  plainly,  that  if  there 
be  a  metropolitan  or  a  patriarch  in  those  churches,  his  judg- 
ment is  final,  and  there  ought  to  be  no  appeal  to  Rome. 
Secondly,  it  is  as  plain,  that  in  those  ancient  times  of  the 
church  government  Britain  was  never  subject  to  the  see  of 
Rome ;  for  it  was  one  of  the  esix  diocesses  of  the  west  empire, 
and  had  a  primate  of  its  own :  nay,  f  John  Capgrave,  one  of 
your  own,  and  learned  for  those  times,  and  long  before  him 
William  of  Malmsbury,  tell  us  that  "  pope  Urban  the  Second, 
at  the  council  held  at  Bari  in  Apulia,  accounted  my  worthy 
predecessor  St.  Anselm  as  his  own  compeer,  and  said  he  was 
the  apostolic  and  patriarch  of  the  other  world,"  (so  he  then 
termed  this  island.)  Now  the  Britons  having  a  primate  of 
their  own,  (which  is  greater  than  a  metropolitan,)  yea,  a 
s  patriarch,  if  you  will,  he  could  not  be  appealed  from  to 

b  Nam  contra  horum  antistitum  (de  omnium    ecclesiarum   caput   est,  causa 

patriarchis  loquitur)  sententias,  non  esse  audienda  est,  £c.    S.  Greg.  ibid, 

locum  appellation!  a  majoribus  nostris  e  Notitia  provinciarum  occidentalium, 

constitutum  est.  Cod.  L.  I.  tit.  4. 1. 29.  ex  per  Guidum  Pancirolum,  lib.  ii.  c.  48. 

editione  Gothofredi — Si  non  rata  ha-  f  Hunc  cunctis  liberalium  artium  dis- 

buerit  utraque  pars,  quae  judicata  sunt,  ciplinis  eruditum   pro  magistro  tenea- 

tunc   beatissimus  patriarcha   direceseos  mus,  et  quasi  comparem,  velut  alterius 

illius,  inter  eos  audiat,  &c.    Nulla  parte  orbis  apostolicum  et  patriarcham,  &c. 

ejus  sententiae  contradicere  valente.  Au-  Jo.  Capgravius  de  Vitis  Sanctorum,  in 

then.  Collat.  9.  tit.  15.  c.  22.  Vita   S.  Anselmi ;    et   Guil.  Malmsbu- 

c  Et  ille  (scilicet  patriarcha)  secun-  riens.  de  Gestis  Pontificum  Anglorum. 

dum   canones,  et  leges  prsebeat  finem.  p.  223.  edit.  Francof.  1601. 

And   there   he    cites   the   novel   itself.  g  Ibi  (Cantuariae  id  est)  prima  sedes 

S.  Greg.  lib.  xi.  Indict.  2.  Ep.  54.  archiepiscopi  habetur,  qui  est  totius  An- 

d  Si  dictum  fuerit,  quod  nee  metro-  gliae  primas  et  patriarcha.  Guil.  Malms- 

politanum  habeat,  nee  patriarcham :  di-  buriensis  in   Prolog,   lib.  i.    de   Gestis 

cendum  est,  quod  a  sede  apostolica,  quae  Pontificum  Anglorum,  p.  195. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  Rome,  by  St.  Gregory's  own  doctrine.  Thirdly,  it  will  be 
hard  for  any  man  to  prove  there  were  any  churches  then  in 
the  world  which  were  not  under  some  either  patriarch  or 
metropolitan.  Fourthly,  if  any  such  were,  it  is  gratis  dictum, 
and  impossible  to  be  proved,  that  all  such  churches,  wherever 
seated  in  the  world,  were  obliged  to  depend  on  Rome ;  for 
manifest  it  is  that  the  bishops  which  were  ordained  in  places 
without  the  limits  of  the  Roman  empire  (which  places  they 
commonly  called  h  barbarous)  were  all  to  be  ordained,  and 
therefore  most  probable  to  be  governed  by  the  patriarch  of 
Constantinople.  And  for  Rome^s  being  the  head  of  all 
churches,  I  have  said  enough  to  that  in  divers  parts  of  this 

XL — And  since  I  am  thus  fallen  upon  the  church  of  Afric, 
I  shall  borrow  another  reason  from  the  practice  of  that 
church,  why  by  principatus  St.  Augustine  neither  did  nor 
could  mean  any  principality  of  the  church,  or  bishop  of  Rome 
over  the  whole  church  of  Christ.  For,  as  the  acts  of  councils 
and  stories  go,  the  African  prelates  finding  that  all  succeed- 
ing popes  were  not  of  Melciades  his  temper,  set  themselves 
to  assert  their  own  liberties,  and  held  it  out  stoutly  against 
Zozimus,  Boniface  the  First,  and  Coelestine  the  First,  who 
were  successively  popes  of  Rome.  At  last  it  was  concluded, 
in  the  sixth  council  of  Carthage,  (wherein  were  assembled 
two  hundred  and  seventeen  bishops,  of  which  St.  Augustine 
himself  was  one,)  that  they  would  not  give  way  to  such  a 
manifest  encroachment  upon  their  rights  and  liberties ;  and 
thereupon  gave  present  notice  to  pope  Coelestine  to  forbear 
sending  his  officers  amongst  them,  uilest  he  should  seem  to 
induce  the  swelling  pride  of  the  world  into  the  church  of 
Christ."  And  this  is  said  to  have  amounted  into  a  formal 
separation  from  the  church  of  Rome,  and  to  have  continued 
for  the  space  of  somewhat  more  than  one  hundred  years. 
Now  that  such  a  separation  there  was  of  the  African  church 
from  Rome,  and  a  reconciliation  after,  stands  upon  the  credit 

h^Praeterea  et  qui  sunt  eV  TOIS  &ap/3a-  is  meant  in  solo  barbarorum.    Annot. 

pt/cots,  in  barbarico,  episcopi  a  sanctis-  ibid. 

simo  throno   sanctissimae   Constantino-         i  Ne  fumosum  typhum  seculi  in  eccle- 

politanae    ecclesiae   ordinentur.      Codex  siam    Christi    videatur    inducere,    &c. 

Canonum  Ecclesiae  universe.   Can.  206.  Epist.  Concil.  Afric.  ad  Papam  Coelesti- 

And  Justellus  proves  it  there  at  large,  imm  Primum.    Apud  Nicolin.  Concil. 

that   by  in   barbarico,  in    that   canon,  torn.  i.  p.  844. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  143 

and  authority  of  two  public  instruments  extant  both  among  Sect.  25. 
the  ancient  councils :  the  one  is  an  k  Epistle  from  Boniface 
the  Second,  in  whose  time  the  reconciliation  to  Rome  is  said 
to  be  made  by  Eulalius,  then  bishop  of  Carthage,  but  the 
separation  instigante  diabolo,  by  the  temptation  of  the  devil ; 
the  other  is  an  }  Exemplar  Precum,  or  copy  of  the  petition  of 
the  same  Eulalius,  in  which  he  damns  and  curses  all  those 
his  predecessors  which  went  against  the  church  of  Rome  : 
amongst  which  Eulalius  must  needs  curse  St.  Augustine ;  and 
pope  Boniface,  accepting  this  submission,  must  acknowledge 
that  St.  Augustine  and  the  rest  of  that  council  deserved  this 
curse,  and  died  under  it,  as  violating  rectce  fidei  regulam,  the 
rule  of  the  right  faith,  (so  the  Exemplar  Precum  begins,)  by 
refusing  the  pope's  authority.  I  will  not  deny  but  that  there 
are  divers  reasons  given  by  the  learned  Romanists  and  re- 
formed writers  for  and  against  the  truth  and  authority  of 
both  these  instruments:  but  because  this  is  too  long  to  be 
examined  here,  I  will  say  but  this,  and  then  make  my  use 
of  it  to  my  present  purpose,  giving  the  church  of  Rome  free 
leave  to  acknowledge  these  instruments  to  be  true  or  false, 
as  they  please  :  that  which  I  shall  say  is  this ;  These  instru- 
ments are  let  stand  in  all  editions  of  the  councils  and  epistles 
decretal ;  as  for  example,  in  the  old  edition  by  Isidore,  anno 
1524;  and  in  another  old  edition  of  them  printed  anno  1530; 
and  in  that  which  was  published  by  P.  Crabbe,  anno  1538; 
and  in  the  edition  of  Valentinus  Joverius,  anno  1555  ;  and 
in  that  by  Surius,  anno  1567;  and  in  the  edition  at  Venice, 
by  Nicolinus,  anno  1585  :  and  in  all  of  these  without  any 
note  or  censure  upon  them.  And  they  are  in  the  edition  of 
Binius  too,  anno  1618  ;  but  there  is  a  censure  upon  them,  to 
keep  a  quarter,  it  may  be,  with  mBaronius,  who  was  the  first 
(I  think)  that  ever  quarrelled  them,  and  he  doth  it  tartly. 
And  since,  n  Bellarmine  follows  the  same  way,  but  more 
doubtfully.  This  is  that  which  I  had  to  say.  And  the  use 
which  I  shall  make  of  these  instruments,  whether  they  be 

k    Epist.   Bonifacii   II.    apud   Nicol.         n  Valde  mihi  illae  epistolae  suspectse 

Concil.  torn.  ii.  p.  544.  sunt.    Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  ii. 

1  Exemp.  Precum  apud  Nicolin.  ibid.  c.  25.  §.  Respondeo  primum. — Sed  si 

p.  525.  forte  illae  epistolae  verae  sunt,  nihil  enirn 

m  Baron.  Annal.  an.  ad  419.   num.  affirmo,  &c.    Ibid.  §.  ult. 
93,  94- 

144  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  true  or  false,  is  this :  They  are  either  true  or  false,  that  is 
of  necessity.  If  they  be  false,  then  Boniface  the  Second,  and 
his  accomplices  at  Rome,  or  some  for  them,  are  notorious 
forgers,  and  that  of  records  of  great  consequence  concerning 
the  government  and  peace  of  the  whole  church  of  Christ,  and 
to  the  perpetual  infamy  of  that  see ;  and  all  this  foolishly, 
and  to  no  purpose :  for  if  there  were  no  such  separation  as 
these  records  mention  of  the  African  churches  from  the 
Roman,  to  what  end  should  Boniface,  or  any  other,  counter- 
feit an  epistle  of  his  own,  and  a  submission  of  Eulalius  ?  On 
the  other  side,  if  these  instruments  be  true,  (as  the  sixth 
council  of  Carthage,  against  all  other  arguments,  makes  me 
incline  to  believe  they  are,  in  substance  at  least,  though  per- 
haps not  in  all  circumstances,)  then  it  is  manifest  that  the 
church  of  Afric  separated  from  the  church  of  Rome ;  that 
this  separation  continued  above  one  hundred  years  ;  that  the 
church  of  Afric  made  this  separation  in  a  national  council  of 
their  own,  which  had  in  it  two  hundred  and  seventeen  bishops  ; 
that  this  separation  was  made  (for  aught  appears)  only  be- 
cause they  at  Rome  were  too  ready  to  entertain  appeals  from 
the  church  of  Afric,  as  appears  in  the  case  of  °Appiarius, 
who  then  appealed  thither;  that  St.  Augustine,  Eugenius, 
Fulgentius,  and  all  those  bishops  and  other  martyrs  which 
suffered  in  the  Vandalic  persecution,  died  in  the  time  of 
this  separation ;  that  if  this  separation  were  not  just,  but  a 
schism,  then  these  famous  Fathers  of  the  church  died  (for 
aught  appears)  in  actual  and  unrepented  schism,  Pand  out  of 
the  church ;  and  if  so,  then  how  comes  St.  Augustine  to  be 
and  be  accounted  a  saint  all  over  the  Christian  world,  and  at 
Rome  itself?  But  if  the  separation  were  just,  then  is  it  far 
more  lawful  for  the  church  of  England  by  a  national  council 
to  cast  off  the  pope's  usurpation  (as  ^she  did)  than  it  was 
for  the  African  church  to  separate ;  because  then  the  African 
church  excepted  only  against  the  pride  of  Rome  rin  case  of 

o  And  so  the   council   of  Carthage  norum  martyrum  agmina,  qui  in  per- 

sent  word   to  pope   Coelestine    plainly,  secutione  Vandalica  pro  fide  catholica, 

that  in  admitting  such  appeals  he  brake  &c.    Baron.  Annal.  an.  419.  num.  93. 

the   decrees    of   the    council   of    Nice,  et  Binius  in  Notis  ad  Epist.  Bonifacii  II. 

Epist.   Concil.    Afric.   ad    Coelestinum,  ad  Eulalium. 

c.  105.  apud  Nicol.  Cone.  torn.  i.  p.  844.  q  Sect.  24.  num.  V. 

P  Plane   ex   ecclesias   catholic*  albo  r    Bellarm.    de    Rom.    Pont.   lib.  ii. 

expungenda  fuissent  sanctorum  Africa-  c.  25.  §.  2. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  145 

appeals,  and  two  other  canons  less  material,  but  the  church  Sect.  25. 
of  England  excepts  (besides  this  grievance)  against  many 
corruptions  in  doctrine  belonging  to  the  faith,  with  which 
Borne  at  that  time  of  the  African  separation  was  not  tainted. 
And  I  am  out  of  all  doubt  that  St.  Augustine  and  those 
other  famous  men  in  their  generations  durst  not  thus  have 
separated  from  Rome,  had  the  pope  had  that  powerful  prin- 
cipality over  the  whole  church  of  Christ,  and  that  by  Christ's 
own  ordinance  and  institution,  as  A.  C.  pretends  he  had.  A.C.  p.  58. 

XII. — I  told  you  a  little  s before  that  the  popes  grew  under 
the  emperors  till  they  had  overgrown  them :  and  now,  lest 
A.  C.  should  say  I  speak  it  without  proof,  I  will  give  you  a 
brief  touch  of  the  shurch  story  in  that  behalf,  and  that  from 
the  beginning  of  the  emperors1  becoming  Christians  to  the 
time  of  Charles  the  Great,  which  contains  about  five  hundred 
years :  for  so  soon  as  the  emperors  became  Christian,  the 
church  (which  before  was  kept  under  by  persecutions)  began 
to  be  put  in  bettar  order.  For  the  calling  and  authority  of 
bishops  over  the  inferior  clergy,  that  was  a  thing  of  known 
use  and  benefit  for  preservation  of  unity  and  peace  in  the 
church.  And  so  much  *  St.  Jerome  tells  us,  though,  being 
none  himself,  he  was  no  great  friend  to  bishops.  And  this 
was  so  settled  in  the  minds  of  men  from  the  very  infancy  of 
the  Christian  cnurch,  as  that  it  had  not  been  to  that  time 
contradicted  b}  any.  So  that  then  there  was  no  controversy 
about  the  callng;  all  agreed  upon  that:  the  only  difficulty 
was  to  accommodate  the  places  and  precedencies  of  bishops 
among  themselves,  for  the  very  necessity  of  order  and  govern- 
ment. To  do  this,  the  most  equal  and  impartial  way  was, 
that  "  as  the  church  is  in  the  commonwealth,  not  the  com- 

8  Sect.  25.  nun.  X.  same  epistle  he  acknowledges  it;  Tra- 

t   Quod  autenr   postea    unus  electus  ditionem  esse  apostolicam ;    nay,  more 

est  qui  caeteris  jrseponeretur,  in  schis-  than  so,  he  affirms  plainly  that  uhi  non 

matis  remedium  factum  est,  ne  unus-  est  sacerdos,  non  est  ecclesia.   S.  Hieron. 

quisque  ad  se  tnhens  Christ!  ecclesiam  advers.  Luciferian.     And  in  that  place 

rumperet.    Nam  et  Alexandrine  a  Marco  most  manifest  it  is,  that  St.  Jerome  hy 

evangelista  presH'teri  semper  unum  ex  sacerdos jneans  a  bishop;  for  he  speaks 

se  electum  in  excellentiori   gradu   col-  de  sacerdote  qui  potestatem  hahet  ordi- 

locatum,    episcopum    nominabant,    &c.  nandi,  which,  in  St.  Jerome's  own  judg- 

S.  Hieron.  in  Epist.  ad  Evagrium.     So,  ment,  no  mere  priest  had,  but  a  bishop 

even  according  to  St.  Jerome,  bishops  only.    S.  Hieron.  Epist.  ad  Evagrium. 

had  a  very  ancient  and  honourable  de-  So,  even  with  him,  no  bishop  and  no 

scent  in  the  church,  from  St.  Mark  the  church, 
evangelist:  and  about  the  end  of  the 

146  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  monwealth  in  it,"  (as  "Optatus  tells  us,)  so  the  honours  of 
the  church  should  x  follow  the  honours  of  the  state :  and  so 
it  was  insinuated,  if  not  ordered  (as  appears)  by  the  canons 
of  the  councils  of  Chalcedon  and  Antioch.  And  this  was  the 
very  fountain  of  papal  greatness,  the  pope  having  his  resi- 
dence in  the  great  imperial  city.  But  precedency  is  one 
thing,  and  authority  is  another :  it  was  thought  fit  therefore, 
though  (as  >'St.  Cyprian  speaks)  episcopatus  unus  est,  the  call- 
ing of  a  bishop  be  one  and  the  same,  that  yet  among  bishops 
there  should  be  a  certain  subordination  and  subjection.  The 
empire  therefore  being  cast  into  several  Divisions  (which  they 
then  called  diocesses),  every  diocess  contained  several  pro- 
vinces, every  province  several  bishoprics:  the  chief  of  the 
diocess  (in  that  larger  sense)  was  called  efapx.0?,  and  some- 
times a  patriarch ;  the  chief  of  a  province,  a  metropolitan : 
next,  the  bishops  in  their  several  diocessos  (as  we  now  use 
that  word) ;  among  these  there  was  effectual  subjection  re- 
spectively, grounded  upon  canon  and  positive  law,  in  their 
several  quarters,  but  over  them  none  at  all  ;\  all  the  difference 
there  was  but  honorary,  not  authoritative,  j  If  the  ambition 
of  some  particular  persons  did  attempt  now  and  then  to 
break  these  bounds,  it  is  no  marvel ;  for  no  palling  can  sanc- 
tify all  that  have  it.  And  Socrates  tells  us  ithat  in  this  way 
the  bishops  of  Alexandria  and  Rome  advanced  themselves  to 
a  great  height,  irtpa  rrjs  icptoa-vvrjs,  even  beyond  the  quality 
of  bishops.  Now  upon  view  of  story  it  will  appear,  that  what 
advantage  accrued  to  Alexandria  was  gotten  jby  the  violence 
of  Theophilus,  patriarch  there,  a  man  of  exceeding  great 
learning,  and  of  no  less  violence  :  and  he  made  no  little 
advantage  out  of  this,  that  the  empress  Euc^oxia  used  his 
help  for  the  casting  of  St.  Chrysostom  out  of  Constantinople. 
But  the  Roman  prelates  grew,  by  a  steady  and  constant 
watchfulness  upon  all  occasions,  to  increase  t)ie  honour  of 
that  see,  interposing  and  z  assuming  to  themselves  to  be  mn- 
dices  canonutn  (as  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  speaks),  defenders 
and  restorers  of  the  canons  of  the  church ;  which  was  a  fair 
pretence,  and  took  extremely  well.  But  yet  the  world  took 

u  Non  enim  respub.  est  in  ecclesia,         y  S.  Cyprian,  lib.  de  Simp.  Praelat. 
sed  ecclesia  in  repub.    Optat.  lib.  iii.  z  "n*  A*ymwt]  Ut  aiunt,  sive  se  jac- 

x  Concil.  Chalcedon.  can.  9.  et  act.  tantesse.  Greg.  Nazianz.  Carm.  de  Vita 

xyi'  sua,  p.  26. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  147 

notice  of  this  their  aim :  for  in  all  contestations  betwixt  the  Sect.  25. 
east  and  the  west,  which  were  nor  small  nor  few,  the  western 
bishops  objected  levity  to  the  eastern,  and  they  again  arro- 
gancy  to  the  bishops  of  the  west,  as  aBilius  observes,  and 
upon  very  warrantable  testimonies.  For  all  this  the  bishop 
of  Rome  continued  in  good  obedience  to  the  emperor,  endur- 
ing his  censures  and  judgments :  and  being  chosen  by  the 
clergy  and  people  of  Borne,  he  accepted  from  the  emperor 
the  ratification  of  that  choice  ;  insomuch  that,  about  the  year 
579,  when  all  Italy  was  on  fire  with  the  Lombards,  and 
bPelagius  the  Second,  constrained  through  the  necessity  of 
the  times,  contrary  to  the  example  of  his  predecessors,  to 
enter  upon  the  popedom  without  the  emperor's  leave,  St. 
Gregory,  then  a  deacon,  was  shortly  after  sent  on  embassy  to 
excuse  it.  About  this  time  brake  out  the  ambition  of  c  John, 
patriarch  of  Constantinople,  affecting  to  be  universal  bishop. 
He  was  countenanced  in  this  by  Mauricius  the  emperor,  but 
sourly  opposed  by  Pelagius  and  St.  Gregory ;  insomuch  that 
dSt.  Gregory  says  plainly,  "  That  this  pride  of  his  shews  that 
the  times  of  Antichrist  were  near."  So  as  yet  (and  this  was 
now  upon  the  point  of  six  hundred  years  after  Christ)  there 
\vas  no  universal  bishop,  no  one  monarch  over  the  whole  J-, 
militant  church.  But  Mauricius  being  deposed  and  murdered 
by  Phocas,  Phosas  conferred  upon  e  Boniface  the  Third  that 

a  Orieutalibus  lentas,  occidental} bus  bishop  of  Rome  nor  any  other  ought  to 

arrogantia  invicem  objecta  est.  Bilius  take  on  him  that  title.  Cura  totius 

Annot.  in  S.  Greg.  Nazianz.  Vitam,  ecclesue  et  principatus  S.  Petro  commit- 

nurn.  153. — Quid  »pus  est  occidental!  titur,  et  tamen  universalis  apostolus  non 

supercilio  ?  ex  S.  Basil.,  £c.  vocatur-  S.  Greg.  lib.  iv.  epist.  76. 

b  Haec  una  fuit  ;ausa  quare  Pelagius  (Therefore  neither  is  his  successor  uni- 

injussu  principis  lontifex  creatus  sit,  versal  bishop.) — Nunquid  ego  hac  in  re 

quum  extra  obsessam  ab  hoste  urbem  propriam  causam  defendo  ?  Nunquid 

initti  quispiam  noa  posset,  &c.  Postea  specialem  injuriam  vindico  ?  Et  nou 

itaque  ad  placandum  imperatorem  Gre-  magis  causam  omnipotentis  Dei  et  uni- 

gorius  diaconus,  &c.  Platina  in  Vita  versalis  ecclesiae  ?  Where  he  plainly  de- 

Pelagii  II.  et  Onuph.  ibid.  uies  that  he  speaks  in  his  own  cause, 

c  Onuph.  in  Plat,  in  Vita  Bonif.  III.  or  in  the  cause  of  his  see. — Per  vene- 

d  In  hac  ejus  saperbia  quid  aliud  nisi  randam  Chalcedonensem  synodum  hoc 

propinqua  jam  Antichrist!  esse  tempora  nomen  Rom.  pontifici  oblatum  est,  sed 

designatur.  S.  Greg.  lib.  iv.  epist.  78.  nullus  eorum  unquam  hoc  singularitatis 

e  It  maybe  they  will  say,  St.  Gregory  vocabulum  assurnpsit,  nee  uti  consensit, 

did  not  inveigh  against  the  thing,  but  ne  dum  privatum  aliquid  daretur  uni, 

the  person;  that  John  of  Constantinople  honore  debito  sacerdotes  privarentur 

should  take  that  upon  him  which  be-  universi,  &c. ;  where  he  plainly  says 

longed  to  the  pope ;  but  it  is  manifest  the  Roman  bishops  rejected  this  title, 

by  St.  Gregory's  own  text,  that  he  speaks  Ibid.  And  yet  for  all  this,  pope  Gre- 

against  the  thing  itself,  that  neither  the  gory  VII.  delivers  it  as  one  of  his  dic- 

L  2 

148  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  very  honour  which  two  of  his  predecessors  had  declaimed 
against  as  fmonstrous  and  blasphemous,  if  not  antichristian. 
Where,  by  the  way,  either  those  two  popes,  Pelagius  and 
St.  Gregory,  erred  in  this  weighty  business  about  an  universal 
bishop  over  the  whole  church ;  or  if  they  did  not  err,  Boni- 
face and  the  rest  which  after  him  took  it  upon  them  were  in 
their  very  predecessor's  judgment  antichristian,  But  to  pro- 
ceed. sAs  yet  the  right  of  election  or  ratification  of  the 
pope  continued  in  the  emperor ;  but  thdn  the  Lombards  grew 
so  great  in  Italy,  and  the  empire  was  so  infested  with  Sara- 
cens, and  such  changes  happened  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  as 
that  neither  for  the  present  the  homage  of  the  pope  was 
useful  to  the  emperor,  nor  the  protection  of  the  emperor 
available  for  the  pope.  By  this  means  ihe  bishop  of  Rome 
was  left  to  play  his  own  game  by  himself;  a  thing  which,  as 
it  pleased  him  well  enough,  so  both  he  &nd  his  successors 
made  great  advantage  by  it:  for  being  grown  to  that  emi- 
nence by  the  emperor,  and  the  greatnes^  of  that  city  and 
place  of  his  abode,  he  found  himself  the  mo^p  free,  the  greater 
the  tempest  was  that  beat  upon  the  other.)  And  then,  first, 
hhe  set  himself  to  alienate  the  hearts  of  ihe  Italians  from 
the  emperor;  next,  he  opposed  himself  aglinst  him.  And 
about  the  year  seven  hundred  and  ten  popelConstantine  the 
First  did  also  first  of  all  openly  confront  \Philippicus  the 
emperor  in  defence  of  images,  as  iOnuphrius \tells  us.  After 
him  k  Gregory  the  Second  and  the  Third  took  up  his  example, 
and  did  the  like  by  Leo  Isaurus.  By  this  timq  the  Lombards 
began  to  pinch  very  close,  and  to  vex  on  all  Bides  not  Italy 

tates,  in  a  council  held  at  Rome  about  tenderet,  quod  supenoribus  temporibus 

the  year   1076,   Quod   solus   Roraanus  fere  magis  cum  ponqficibus  quam  cum 

pontifex  jure  Aic&tnr  universalis.  Baron,  imperatoribus    sensisient    ingressurum 

Annal.  ad  an.  1076.  num.  31  et  32.  Romam  interficere  cojstituerant.   (And 

f  Absit  a  cordibus  Christianorum  no-  the  emperor's  own  gorernor  was  fain  to 

men  istud  blasphemise.    S.  Greg.  lib.  iv.  be  defended  from   thfc   emperor's  own 

epist.  76., — In  isto  scelesto  vocabulo  con-  soldiers  by  the  pope's  power,  who  had 

sentire,  nihil  est  aliud  quam  fidem  per-  gotten   interest  in   th&n    against  their 

dere.  Ibid.  lib.  iv.  epist.  83.  own  master.)  Platina  ia  Vita  Johan.VI. 

%  Vana  tune  habebatur  cleri  et  po-  Absimarus  was  then  eraperor. 
puli  electio,  nisi  aut  imperatores,  aut         i  Primus  omnium  Uom.  pontificum 
eorum  exarchi  confirmasseut.    Plat,  in  imperatori  Graeco  Philippico  in  os  re- 
Vita  Severini  I.  sistere  palam  ausus  est.  Onuph.  in  Plat. 

h  Quum  Theophylactus  exarchus  im-  in  Vita  Constant! ni  I. 
peratoris  Italiam  peteret,  milites  Itali,         k  Platina  in  Vita  Gregor.  II.  et  HI. 
veriti  ne  quid  mali  ejus  adventus  por- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  149 

only,  but  Rome  too.  This  drives  the  pope  to  seek  a  new  Sect.  25. 
patron ;  and  very  fitly  he  meets  with  Charles  Martel  in 
France,  that  famous  warrior  against  the  Saracens ;  ^im  he 
implores  in  defence  of  the  church  against  the  Lombards. 
This  address  seems  very  advisedly  taken,  at  least  it  proves 
very  fortunate  to  them  both ;  mfor  in  short  time  it  dissolved 
the  kingdom  of  the  Lombards  in  Italy,  which  had  then  stood 
two  hundred  and  four  years,  which  was  the  pope's  security, 
and  it  brought  the  crown  of  France  into  the  house  of  Charles, 
and  shortly  after  the  western  empire.  And  now  began  the 
pope  to  be  great  indeed ;  for  by  the  bounty  of  n  Pepin,  son  ~-f- 
of  Charles,  that  which  was  taken  from  the  Lombards  was 
given  to  the  pope,  so  that  now  of  a  bishop  he  became  a 
temporal  prince.  But  when  Charles  the  Great  had  set  up 
the  western  empire,  then  he  resumed  the  ancient  and  original 
power  of  the  ernpeior,  to  govern  the  church,  to  call  councils, 
to  order  papal  elections.  And  this  power  continued  in  his 
posterity ;  for  this  right  of  the  emperor  was  in  force  and  use 
in  Gregory  the  Seventh's  time,  °who  was  confirmed  in  the 
popedom  by  Henry  the  Fourth,  whom  he  afterward  deposed : 
and  it  might  hava  continued  longer,  if  the  succeeding  empe- 
rors had  had  abilities  enough  to  secure  or  vindicate  their 
own  right ;  but  the  pope,  keeping  a  strong  council  about 
him,  and  meeting  with  some  weak  princes,  and  they  ofttimes 
distracted  with  *reat  and  dangerous  wars,  grew  stronger,  till 
he  got  the  better.  So  this  is  enough  to  shew  how  the  popes 
climbed  up  by  1he  emperors  till  they  overtopped  them ;  which 
is  all  I  said  before,  and  have  now  proved.  And  this  was 
about  the  yea:  1073  ?  (f°r  ^ne  whole  popedom  of  Gregory 
the  Seventh  was  begun  and  ended  witHri  the  reign  of  William 
the  Conqueror.)  Yet  was  it  carried  n  succeeding  times  with 
great  changes  of  fortune  and  different  success ;  the  emperor 
sometimes  plucking  from  the  pope,  and  the  Ppope  from  the 

1  Ut  laboranti  Romae  et  ecclesiae  pri-  o  Imperator  in  gratiam  cum  Gregorio 

mo   quoque   termore    auxilium    ferret,  rediit,  eundemque  in  pontificatu  confir- 

&c.    Platin.  in  Vita  Greg.  III.  mavit,  lit  turn  imperatorum  mos  erat. 

m  Quae  res  seniel  incepta  cum  Longo-  Plat,  in  Vita  Gregor.  Septim. 

bardici  regni  excdio  finita  est.    Onuph.  P  Multi  deinde  fuerunt  imperatores 

in  Plat,  in  Vita  Constantini  Primi.  Hen.  similiores,  quam  Jul.  Caesari,  quos 

n  Redditus  itique  Romanis  exarcha-  subigere  non  fuit   difficile,  dum   domi 

tus  est,  quicquid  Padum  et  Apenninum  rerum  omnium  securi,  &c.    Calv.  Instit. 

interjacet,  &c.   Plat,  in  Vita  Stephan.  lib.  iv.  c.  n.  §.  13. 


150  Archbishop  Land  against 

Sect.  25.  emperor,  winning  and  losing  ground,  as  their  spirits,  abilities, 
aids,  and  opportunities  were,  till  at  the  last  the  pope  settled 
himself  upon  the  grounds  laid  by  q  Gregory  the  Seventh,  in 
the  great  power  which  he  now  uses  in  and  over  these  parts  of 
the  Christian  world. 

XIII. Thirdly,  A.  C.  knowing  it  is  not  enough  to  say 

this,  "  That  the  pope  is  pastor  of  the  whole  church,"  labours 
to  prove  it.  And  first  he  tells  us  that  Irenaeus  intimates  so 
much,  but  he  doth  not  tell  us  where ;  and  he  is  much  scanted 
of  ancient  proof,  if  Irenseus  stand  alone.  Besides,  Irenseus 
was  a  bishop  of  the  Gallican  church,  and  a  very  unlikely  man 
to  captivate  the  liberty  of  that  church  under  the  more  power- 
ful principality  of  Rome.  And  how  can  we  have  better  evi- 
dence of  his  judgment  touching  that  j^incipality  than  the 
actions  of  his  life  I  When  pope  Victor  Excommunicated  the 
Asian  churches  ddpoco?,  rall  at  a  blow,  wp  not  Irenseus  the 
chief  man  that  reprehended  him  for  it  \  \.  very  unmeet  and 
undutiful  thing  sure  it  had  been  in  Irenes,  in  deeds  to  tax 
him  of  rashness  and  inconsiderateness,  wh<^n  in  words  A.  C. 
would  have  to  be  acknowledged  by  him  "I  the  supreme  and 
infallible  pastor  of  the  universal  church."  vBut  the  place  of 
Irenseus  which  A.  C.  means  (I  think)  is  this,  where  he  uses 
these  words  indeed,  but  short  of  A.  O.'s  senselof  it :  "  sTo  this 
church,"  he  speaks  of  Borne,  "  propter  potemorem  principali- 
tatem,  for  the  more  powerful  principality  o^  it,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  every  church,  that  is,  the  faithful) undique,  round 
A.  C.  p.  58.  about,  should  have  recourse."  "  Should  have  reiourse,"  so  A.  C. 

q  For  in  a  synod  at  Rome  about  the  liber  canonicus  hateatur  absque  illius 

year  1076,  pope  Gregory  the  Seventh  authoritate."     "  Quod   sententia   illius 

established    certain    brief    conclusions,  a  nullo  debet  retraction,  et  ipse  omnium 

twenty-seven  in  number,  upon  which  solus  retractare  potes."     "  Quod  Rom. 

stands  almost  all  the  greatness  of  the  ecclesia  nunquam  eiravit,  nee  in  per- 

papacy.     These  conclusions   are  called  petuum,    scriptura    testante,    errabit." 

dictatus  papce.     And  they  are  reckoned  "  Quod    Rom.    pgutfex,    si    canonice 

up  by  Baronius  in  the  year  1076.  num.  fuerit   ordinatus,  meritis  B.  Petri   in- 

31,  32,  &c     But  whether  this  dictator-  dubitanter  efficitur  stnctus."     "Quod 

ship  did  now  first  invade  the  church,  a   fidelitate  iniquorun  subditos  potest 

I    cannot    certainly    say.      The    chief  absolvere." 

of    those    propositions    follow    here. —  r  Euseb.  lib.  v.  c.  3 1. 

"  Quod  solus  Rom.  pontifex  jure  dica-  s  Ad  hanc  ecclesian  propter  poten- 

tur  universalis."     "  Quod  solius  papse  tiorem  principalitatem,  necesse  est  om- 

pedes   omnes    principes    deosculentur."  nem  con  venire  ecclesiam,  i.  e.  eos  qui 

"  Quod    liceat    illi    imperatores    depo-  sunt   undique  fideles :  in  qua   semper 

nere."     "  Quod  nulla  synodus  absque  ab    his    qui    sunt   undique,    conservata 

praecepto  ejus  debet  generalis  vocari."  est   ea   quae   est   ab    apostolis   traditio. 

"  Quod   nulhim   capitulum,   nullusque  Iren.  lib.  iii.  c.  3. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  151 

translates  it ;  and  what  doth  this  avail  him  ?  Very  great  Sect.  25. 
reason  was  there  in  Irenseus  his  time,  that  upon  any  differ- 
ence arising  in  the  faith,  omnes  undique  fideles,  all  the  faith- 
ful, or  if  you  will,  all  the  churches  round  about,  should  have 
recourse,  that  is,  resort  to  Rome,  being  the  imperial  city; 
and  so  a  church  of  more  powerful  principality  than  any  other 
at  that  time  in  those  parts  of  the  world.  Well,  will  this 
exalt  Rome  to  be  the  head  of  the  church  universal  \  What 
if  the  states  and  policies  of  the  world  be  much  changed  since, 
and  this  conveniency  of  resorting  to  Rome  be  quite  ceased  ? 
then  is  not  Rome  divested  of  her  more  powerful  principality? 
But  the  meaning  of  A.  C.  is,  we  must  so  have  recourse  to 
Rome  as  to  submit  our  faith  to  hers  ;  and  then,  not  only  in 
Irenseus  his  time,  but  through  all  times  reform  ourselves  by 
her  rule  :  that  is.  all  the  faithful,  not  undique,  round  about, 
but  ubique,  everywhere,  must  agree  with  Rome  in  point  of 
faith.  This  he  means,  and  Rome  may  thank  him  for  it ;  but 
this  Irenseus  saich  not,  nor  will  his  words  bear  it,  nor  durst 
A.  C.  therefore  jonstrue  him  so,  but  was  content  to  smooth 
it  over  with  this  ambiguous  phrase,  "  of  having  recourse  to 
Rome ;"  yet  this  is  a  place  as  much  stood  upon  by  them  as 
any  other  in  al  antiquity.  And  should  I  grant  them  their 
own  sense,  "  That  all  the  faithful  every  where  must  agree 
with  Rome,'1  (which  I  may  give,  but  can  never  grant,)  yet  were 
not  this  saying  any  whit  prejudicial  to  us  now.  For,  first, 
here  is  a  powerful  principality  ascribed  to  the  church  of 
Rome ;  and  that  no  man  of  learning  doubts  but  the  church 
of  'Rome  had  within  its  own  patriarchate  and  jurisdiction, 
and  that  was  very  large,  containing  *all  the  provinces  in  the 
diocess  of  Italy  (in  the  old  sense  of  the  word  diocess)  ;  which 
provinces  the  lawyers  and  others  term  suburUcarias.  There 
were  ten  of  them ;  the  three  islands,  Sicily,  Corsica,  and 
Sardinia ;  and  the  other  seven  upon  the  firm  land  of  Italy  : 
and  this  (I  take  it)  is  plain  in  Rufinus  ;  for  he  living  shortly 
after  the  Kicene  council,  as  he  did,  and  being  of  Italy,  as  he 
was,  he  might  very  well  know  the  bounds  of  that  patriarch's 
jurisdiction  as  it  was  then  practised  ;  uand  he  says  expressly, 

t  Ed.  Breiewood  Of  the  jurisdiction  u  Apud  Alexaudriam,  ut  in  urbe 
and  limits  of  the  pati-iarchs  in  the  time  Roma,  vetusta  consuetude  servetur,  ut 
of  the  Nicene  council,  ad.  Qu.  i.  M.S.  ille  jEgypti,  ut  hie  suburbicariarum 


152  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  "  That,  according  to  the  old  custom,  the  Eoman  patriarch's 
charge  was  confined  within  the  limits  of  the  suburbicarian 
churches.  To  avoid  the  force  of  this  testimony,  x  cardinal 
Perron  lays  load  upon  Rufinus ;  for  he  charges  him  with 
passion,  ignorance,  and  rashness :  and  one  piece  of  his  igno- 
rance is,  that  he  hath  ill  translated  the  canon  of  the  council 
of  Nice.  Now  be  that  as  it  may,  I  neither  do  nor  can  ap- 
prove his  translation  of  that  canon ;  nor  can  it  be  easily 
proved  that  he  purposely  intended  a  translation :  all  that  I 
urge  is,  that  Rufinus,  living  in  that  time  and  place,  was  very 
like  well  to  know  and  understand  the  limits  and  bounds  of 
that  patriarchate  of  Rome  in  which  he  lived.  Secondly,  here 
is,  That  it  had  potentiorem,  a  more  powerful  principality  than 
other  churches  had.  And  that  the  protestants  grant  too  ; 
and  that  not  only  because  the  Roman  prelate  was  ordine 
primus,  first  in  order  and  degree,  which  sime  one  must  be 
to  avoid  confusion ;  "  ybut  also  because  th^  Roman  see  had 
won  a  great  deal  of  credit,  and  gained  a  gr<jat  deal  of  power 
to  itself  in  church  affairs  :  because  while  W  Greek,  yea, 
and  the  African  churches  too,  were  turbulent  and  distracted 
with  many  and  dangerous  opinions,  the  church  of  Rome  all 
that  while,  and  a  good  while  after  Irenseus  jtoo,  was  more 
calm  and  constant  to  the  truth."  Thirdly,  help  is  a  necessity 
(say  they)  required,  that  every  church,  that  Is,  the  faithful 
which  are  every  where,  agree  with  that  churcji.  But  what ! 
simply  with  that  church  whatever  it  do  or  believe  ?  No, 
nothing  less  :  for  Irenseus  adds,  "  with  that  church  in  qua,  in 
which  is  conserved  that  tradition  which  was  deljvered  by  the 
apostles."  And  God  forbid  but  it  should  be  necessary  for  all 
churches  and  all  the  faithful  to  agree  with  that  lancient  apo- 
stolic church  in  all  those  things  in  which  it  l^eeps  to  the 
doctrine  and  discipline  delivered  by  the  apostles.  \  In  Irenseus 
his  time  it  kept  these  better  than  any  other  chinch,  and  by 
this  in  part  obtained  potentiorem  principalitatem\  a  greater 
\i  power  than  other  churches,  but  not  ovex^l^lther^churches. 
And  (as  they  understand  Irenaeus)  a  necessity  Uy  upon  all 

ecclesiarum  solicitudinem  gerat.   Rufin.  se  opiniomim  dissensionikis  tumultua- 

Eccles.  Hist.  lib.  i.  c.  6.  rentur,  hsec  sedatior  aliis,  et  minus  tur- 

x  Perron's  Reply,  lib.  ii.  c.  6.  bulenta  fuerit.     Calvin.  Instit.  lib.  iv. 

y  Quia  cum  orientales  et  Graecae  ec-  c.  6.  §.  16. 
clesiae,  et  Africanae  etiam,  multis  inter 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  153 

other  churches  to  agree  with  this  ;  but  this  necessity  was  laid  Sect.  25. 
upon  them  by  the  "  then  integrity  of  the  Christian  faith  there 
professed,  not  by  the  universality  of  the  Eoman  jurisdiction  now 
challenged.""  And  let  Rome  reduce  itself  to  the  observation 
of  tradition  apostolic,  to  which  it  then  held,  and  I  will  say  as 
Irenseus  did,  "  That  it  will  be  then  necessary  for  every  church 
and  for  the  faithful  every  where  to  agree  with  it."  Lastly, 
let  me  observe  too,  that  Irenaeus  made  no  doubt  but  that 
Rome  might  fall  away  from  apostolical  tradition,  as  well  as 
other  particular  churches  of  great  name  have  done.  For  he 
does  not  say  in  qua  servanda  semper  erit,  sed  in  qua  servata 
est ;  not,  in  which  church  the  doctrine  delivered  from  the 
apostles  shall  ever  be  entirely  kept,  that  had  been  home 
indeed ;  but  in  which,  by  God's  grace  and  mercy,  it  was  to 
that  time  of  Irengeus  so  kept  and  preserved.  So  we  have 
here,  in  Irenseus  his  judgment,  the  church  of  Rome  then  entire, 
but  not  infallible  ;  and  endowed  with  a  more  powerful  prin- 
cipality than  other  churches,  but  not  with  an  universal  domi- 
nion over  all  other  churches,  which  is  the  thing  in  question. 

XIV. — But  to  this  place  of  Irenseus  A.  0.  joins  a  reason  A.  C.  p.  58. 
of  his  own ;  for  lie  tells  us  the  bishop  of  Rome  is  St.  Peter's 
successor,  and  therefore  to  him  we  must  have  recourse.  The 
Fathers  I  deny  lot  ascribe  very  much  to  St.  Peter,  but  it  is 
to  St.  Peter  in  Ms  own  person  ;  and  among  them  Epiphanius 
is  as  free  and  as  frequent  in  extolling  St.  Peter  as  any  of 
them,  and  yet  did  he  never  intend  to  give  an  absolute  prin-  / 
cipality  to  Rome  in  St.  Peter's  right.  There  is  a  noted  place  | 
in  that  Father,  where  his  words  are  these  :  ';  zFor  the  Lord 
himself  made  St.  Peter  the  first  of  the  apostles  a  firm  rock, 
upon  which  the  church  of  God  is  built,  and  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail  against  it,  &c.  For  in  him  the  faith  is  made 
firm  every  way  who  received  the  key  of  heaven,  &c. :  for  in 
him  all  the  questions  and  subtilties  of  the  faith  are  found." 
This  is  a  great  place  at  first  sight  too,  and  deserves  a  mar- 
ginal note  to  call  young  readers'  eyes  to  view  it.  And  it  hath 

z  Ipse  autem  Dominus  constituit  eum  accepit  clavem  ccelorum,  &c.     In  hoc 

primum   apostolornm,    petram    firmam  enim  omnes  quaestiones  ac  subtilitates 

super  quam  ecclesia  Dei  aedificata  est,  fidei  inveniuntur.     Epiphan.  in  Anco- 

et  portae  inferorum  non  valebunt  adver-  rato,  edit.  Paris.  Lat.    1564.  fol.  497. 

sus    illam,    &c.     Juxta    omnem    enim  A.   edit,   vero   Graeco-Latin.    torn.    ii. 

modum  in  ipso  firmata  est  fides,  qui  p.  14. 

154  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  this  note  in  the  old  Latin  edition  at  Paris,  1564 :  Petri 
principatus,  et  prcestantia,  Peter's  principality  and  excellency. 
This  place,  as  much  show  as  it  makes  for  the  Roman  princi- 
pality, I  shall  easily  clear,  and  yet  do  no  wrong,  either  to  St. 
Peter  or  the  Roman  church.  For  most  manifest  it  is,  that 
the  authority  of  St.  Peter  is  a  urged  here  to  prove  the  God- 
head of  the  Holy  Ghost :  and  then  follow  the  elogies  given  to 
St.  Peter,  the  better  to  set  off  and  make  good  that  authority; 
as  that  he  was  bprinceps  apostolorum,  the  prince  of  the  apo- 
stles, "  and  pronounced  blessed  by  Christ ;  because,  as  God 
the  Father  revealed  to  him  the  Godhead  of  the  Son,  so  did 
he  again  the  Godhead  of  the  Holy  Ghost.11  After  this  Epi- 
phanius  calls  him  "  c  solidam  petram,  a  solid  rock,  upon  which 
the  church  of  God  was  founded,  against  which  the  gates  of 
hell  should  not  prevail :"  and  adds,  "  "|hat  the  faith  was 
rooted  and  made  firm  in  him  d  every  way,  ii  him  who  received 
the  key  of  heaven.11  And  after  this  he  gives  the  reason  of 
all ;  "  e  because  in  him,11  mark,  I  pray,  it  is  still  in  him  as  he 
was  blessed  by  that  revelation  from  God\the  Father,  fSt. 
Matthew  xvi.,  "  were  found  all  the  AeTrroA^yrjjutara,  the  very 
niceties  and  exactness  of  the  Christian  faitV.11  For  he  pro- 
fessed the  Godhead  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
so  omni  modo,  every  point  of  faith  was  roofed  in  him;  and 
this  is  the  full  meaning  of  that  learned  FatheiJ  in  this  passage. 
Now  therefore,  building  the  church  upon  St;  Peter,  in  Epi- 
phanius  his  sense,  is  not  as  if  he  and  his  successors  were  to 
be  monarchs  over  it  for  ever;  but  it  is  th^  edifying  and 
establishing  the  church  in  the  true  faith  of  jChrist  by  the 
confession  which  St.  Peter  made.  And  so  he  expresses 
himself  elsewhere  most  plainly  e ;  "  St.  Peteir,11  saith  he, 
"  who  was  made  to  us  indeed  a  solid  rock  firming  the  faith 
of  our  Lord.  On  which  (rock)  the  church  is  \)ui\\juxta  omnem 
modum,  every  way.  First,  that  he  confessed  Chiist  to  be  the 

a  Ti  on  eireipcurei/.     For  there  begins  Domini.     In  qua  (petia)  aedificata  est 

the  argument  of  Epiphanius.  ecclesia  juxta  omnem  njodurn.     Primo, 

b  'O  Kopvcpadraros.  quod  confessus  est  Christum  esse  Filium 

c  Tyv  a-reptav  irerpav.  Dei  vivi,  et  statim  audirit,  Super  hanc 

d  Kara  irdvra  yap,  &c.  petram  solid*  fidei  cedijicabo  ecclesiam 

e  'Ef  Tovrip  yapt  &c.  meam — Etiam  de  Spiritu  Sancto  idem, 

f  Matt.  xvi.  17.  &c.    Epiphan.  Haeres.  lib,  ii.  59.  contra 

SAOs  yfyovev,  &c.     Qui  factus  est  Catharos,  torn.  i.  p.  500,  edit.  Graeco- 

nobis  revera  solida  petra  firmans  fidem  Lat. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  155 

Son  of  the  living  God,  and  by  and  by  he  heard,  Upon  this  Sect.  25. 
rock  of  solid  faith  /  will  build  my  church :  and  the  same  con- 
fession he  made  of  the.  Holy  Ghost.11  Thus  was  St.  Peter 
a  solid  rock  upon  which  the  church  was  founded  omni  modo, 
every  way  ;  that  is,  the  faith  of  the  church  was  h  confirmed 
by  him  in  every  point.  But  that  St.  Peter  was  any  rock  or 
foundation  of  the  church,  so  as  that  he  and  his  successors 
must  be  relied  on  in  all  matters  of  faith,  and  govern  the 
church  like  princes  or  monarchs,  that  Epiphanius  never 
thought  of.  And  that  he  never  did  think  so,  I  prove  it  thus : 
for,  beside  this  apparent  meaning  of  his  context,  (as  is  here 
expressed,)  how  could  he  possibly  think  of  a  supremacy  due 
to  St.  Peter's  successor,  that  in  most  express  terms,  and  that 
i  twice  repeated,  makes  St.  James  the  brother  of  our  Lord, 
and  not  St.  Peter,  succeed  our  Lord  in  the  principality  of  the 
church  ?  And  Epiphanius  was  too  full  both  of  learning  and 
industry  to  speak  contrary  to  himself  in  a  point  of  this 

XV. — Next,  since  A.  C.  speeds  no  better  with  Irenseus,  heA.C.  p.  58. 
will  have  it  out  of  scripture.  And  he  still  tells  us  the  bishop 
of  Rome  is  St.  Peter's  successor.  Well ;  suppose  that.  What 
then  ?  What  '  why  then  he  succeeded  in  all  St.  Peter's 
k  prerogatives  which  are  ordinary  and  belonged  to  him  as  a 
bishop,  though  not  in  the  extraordinary  which  belonged  to 
him  as  an  apostle ;  for  that  is  it  which  you  all  say  1,  but  no 
man  proves.  If  this  be  so,  yet  then  I  must  tell  A.  C.,  St. 
Peter  in  his  ordinary  power  was  never  made  pastor  of  the 
whole  church:  nay,  in  his  extraordinary  he  had  no  mmore 
powerful  principality  than  the  other  apostles  had.  A  "primacy 
of  order  was  never  denied  him  by  the  protestants;  and  an 
universal  supremacy  of  power  was  never  granted  him  by  the 
primitive  Christians.  Yea,  but  Christ  promised  the  keys  to 

h  riepl  rov  xyiov  TlvsvfJiaTos  6  avrbs  §.  Resporideo  pontificatum. 

aav/xxAi^iETat  ruins.  Ibid.  1  Sect.  25.  num.  X. 

i  Ille  primus  (speaking  of  St.  James  ni  Bellarm.  ibid. 

the  Lord's  brother)  episcopalem  cathe-  n  The  Fathers  gave  three  preroga- 
dram  cepit,  quum  ei  ante  cueteros  omnes  tives  to  St.  Peter — of  authority,  of 
suum  in  terris  thronum  Dominus  tradi-  primacy,  and  of  principality,  but  not 
disset.  Kpiphan.  Haeres.  lib.  iii.  78.  of  supremacy  of  power.  Raynold  con- 
torn,  ii.  p.  1039. — Et  fere  similiter,  torn,  tra  Hart.  cap.  5.  divis.  3.  And  he 
i.  lib.  t.  Haeres.  29.  proves  it  at  large. 

k  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  c.  9. 

156  A  rchUshop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  St.  Peter.  °True ;  but  so  did  he  to  Pall  the  rest  of  the  apo- 
stles, and  to  their  successors  as  much  as  to  his.  So  it  is  till 
et  illis,  not  tiM  non  illis,  I  give  the  keys  to  thee  and  them, 
not  to  thee  to  exclude  them ;  unless  any  man  will  think 
heaven-gates  so  easy  that  they  might  open  and  shut  them 
without  the  keys.  And  <i  St.  Augustine  is  plain ;  "  If  this 
were  said  only  to  St.  Peter,  then  the  church  hath  no  power 
to  do  it ;"  which  God  forbid  !  The  keys  therefore  were  given 
to  St.  Peter  and  the  rest  in  a  figure  of  the  church,  to  whose 
power  and  for  whose  use  they  were  given.  But  there  is  not 
one  key  in  all  that  bunch  that  can  let  in  St.  Peter's  successor 
to  a  more  powerful  principality  universal  than  the  successors 
of  the  other  apostles  had. 

A.  C.  p.  58.  XVI. — Yea,  but  Christ  prayed  that  St.  Peter's  faith  might 
not  fail1".  That  is  true ;  and  in  that  sense  that  Christ  prayed 
St.  Peter's  faith  failed  not ;  that  is,  in  application  to  his  per- 
son "  for  his  perseverance  in  the  faith,"  as  sSt.  Prosper  ap- 
plies it ;  "  which  perseverance  yet  he  must  otve  and  acknow- 
ledge to  the  grace  of  Christ's  prayer  for  Kim,  not  to  the 
power  and  ability  of  his  own  freewill,"  as  tpt.  Jerome  tells 
us.  uBellarmine  likes  not  this,  "  because,"  s^ith  he,  "  Christ 
here  obtained  some  special  privilege  for  St.  Peter ;  whereas 
perseverance  in  grace  is  a  gift  common  to  all  me  elect :"  and 
he  is  so  far  right.  And  the  special  grace  whfyh  this  prayer 
of  Christ  obtained  for  St.  Peter  was,  that  he  Should  not  fall 
into  a  final  apostasy ;  no,  not  when  Satan  had\sifted  him  to 
the  bran,  that  he  fell  most  horribly  even  int^  a  threefold 
denial  of  his  Master,  and  that  with  a  curse.  A|d  to  recover 
this  and  persevere  was  aliquid  speciale,  I  trow,  jf  any  thing 
ever  were.  But  this  will  not  down  with  Bell^rmine ;  no, 

the  *  aliquid  speciale,  the  special  thing  here  obtained,  was, 


o  Matt.  xvi.  1 8.  potestate   si  voluisset,  ut  non  deficeret 

P  Matt,  xviii.  18,  John  xx.  22.  fides    ejus,    &c.     S.   Hi^-on.    adversus 

q  Si  hoc  Petro  tantum  dictum  est,  Pelagianos,  lib.  ii. 

non  facit  hoc  ecclesia,  &c.     S.  August.         u  Aliquid  speciale.  Bellarm.  cle  Rom. 

Tract.  50.  in  S.  Job.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  cap.  3.  §.   ^ecundo,  quia 

r  Luke  xxii.  32.  sine. 
s  Deum  dare  ut  in  fide  perseveretur.         *  Ut  nee   ipse   ut   pontifex   doceret 

S.    Prosper,    de   Vocat.    Gent.    lib.    i.  unquam  aliquid   contra  fidem,  sive  ut 

rap-  24.  in   sede   ejus   inveniretur  qui   doceret. 

t  Rogavi  ut  non  deficeret,  &c.     Et  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  3.  §. 

certe  juxta  vos  in  apostoli  erat  positum  Alterum  privilegium  est. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  157 

saith  he,  "  that  neither  St.  Peter  himself,  nor  any  other  that  Sect.  25. 
should  sit  in  his  seat,  should  teach  any  thing  contrary  to  the 
true  faith."  That  St.  Peter  after  his  recovery  should  preach 
nothing  either  as  apostle  or  bishop  contrary  to  the  faith,  will 
easily  be  granted  him  ;  but  that  none  of  his  successors  should 
do  it,  but  be  all  infallible,  that  certainly  never  came  within 
the  compass  of  Rogavi  pro  te,  Petre,  I  have  prayed  for  thee, 
Peter.  And  Bellarmine's  proof  of  this  is  his  just  confuta- 
tion ;  for  he  proves  this  exposition  of  that  text  only  by  the 
testimony  of  seven  popes  in  their  own  cause,  and  then  takes 
a  leap  to  Theophylact,  who  says  nothing  to  the  purpose.  So 
that  upon  the  matter  Bellarmine  confesses  there  is  not  one 
Father  of  the  church  disinteressed  in  the  cause  that  under- 
stands this  text  as  Bellarmine  doth,  till  you  come  down  to 
Theophylact.  So  the  pope^s  infallibility  appeared  to  nobody 
but  the  popes  themselves  for  above  a  thousand  years  after 
Christ ;  for  so  long  it  was  before  y  Theophylact  lived :  and  the 
spite  of  it  is,  Tlieophylact  could  not  see  it  neither,  for  the 
most  that  Bellarmine  makes  him  say  is  but  this :  "  z  Because 
I  account  thee  £S  chief  of  my  disciples,  confirm  the  rest ;  for 
this  becomes  thee,  which  art  to  be  a  rock  and  foundation  of 
the  church  after  me."  For  this  is  personal  too,  and  of  St. 
Peter,  and  that  as  he  was  an  apostle :  for  otherwise  than  as 
an  apostle,  he  was  not  a  rock  or  foundation  of  the  church ; 
no,  not  in  a  secondary  sense.  The  special  privilege  therefore 
which  Christ  prayed  for  was  personal  to  St.  Peter,  and  is 
that  which  before  I  mentioned.  And  Bellarmine  himself  says, 
44  That  Christ  a  obtained  by  this  prayer  two  privileges,  espe- 
cial ones  for  St.  Peter :  the  one,  that  he  should  never  quite 
fall  from  the  true  faith,  how  strongly  soever  he  were  tempted  ; 
the  other,  that  there  should  never  be  found  any  sitting  in 
his  seat  that  should  teach  against  it."  Now  for  the  first  of 
these,  b  Bellarmine  doubts  it  did  not  flow  over  to  his  suc- 
cessors. Why  then,  it  is  true  which  I  here  say,  that  this  was 

y  Theophylactus  floruit    circa    anno  a  Impetravit,  et   ibid.  §.  Est   igitur 

Dom.  1072.  tertia. 

z  Quia  te  habeo  principem   discipu-  b  Ex  quibus  privilegiis  primum  for- 

lorum,    confirma    caeteros.     Hoc    enim  tasse  non  manavit  ad  posteros,  at  se- 

decet  te,  qui  post  me  ecclesiae  petra  es  cundum  sine  dubio  manavit  ad  posteros 

et   fundamentum.     Bellarm.  de   Rom.  sive  successores.     Bellarm.  ibid.  §.  Al- 

Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  3.  §.  Praeter  hcs.     Ex  teium  privilegium. 
Theophyl.  in  21.  S.  Luc. 

158  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  25.  personal  to  St.  Peter.  But  the  second,  he  says,  "  out  of  all 
doubt,  passed  over  to  his  successors.11  Nay,  that  is  not  out 
of  all  doubt  neither.  First,  because  many  learned  men  have 
challenged  many  popes  for  teaching  heresy,  and  that  is 
against  the  true  faith :  and  that  which  so  many  learned  men 
have  affirmed  is  not  out  of  all  doubt ;  or  if  it  be,  why  does 
Bellarmine  take  so  much  pains  to  confute  and  disprove  them 
as  che  doth  ?  Secondly,  because  Christ  obtained  of  his  Father 
every  thing  that  he  prayed  for,  if  he  prayed  for  it  absolutely, 
and  not  under  a  condition :  d Father,  I  know  thou  hearest  me 
always.  Now  Christ  here  prayed  absolutely  for  St.  Peter, 
therefore  whatsoever  he  asked  for  him  was  granted.  There- 
fore, if  Christ  intended  his  successors  as  well  as  himself,  his 
prayer  was  granted  for  his  successors  as  well  as  for  himself. 
But  then,  if  Bellarmine  will  tell  us  absolutely,  as  he  doth, 
"  eThat  the  whole  gift  obtained  by  this  prayer  for  St.  Peter 
did  belong  to  his  successors,11  and  then  by  atid  by  after  break 
this  gift  into  two  parts,  and  call  the  first  part  into  doubt 
whether  it  belongs  to  his  successors  or  no,  he  cannot  say  the 
second  part  is  out  of  all  doubt ;  for  if  there  be  reason  of 
doubting  the  one,  there  is  as  much  reason  of  doubting  the 
other,  since  they  stand  both  on  the  same  fdot,  the  validity 
of  Chrises  prayer  for  St.  Peter. 

XVII. — Yea,  but  Christ  charged  St.  Peter  >to  govern  and 
feed  his  whole  flock,  St.  John  xxi.  Nay,  soft,  it  is  but  his 
f sheep  and  his  lambs,  and  that  every  apostle  and  every  apo- 
stle's successor  hath  s charge  to  do,  St.  Matt.  xxViii.;  but  over 
the  whole  flock  I  find  no  one  apostle  or  successor  set.  And 
A.  C.  p.  58.  it  is  a  poor  shift  to  say,  as  A.  C.  doth,  "  That  the  bishop  of 
Rome  is  set  over  the  whole  flock,  because  botl  over  lambs 
and  sheep ;"  for  in  every  flock  that  is  not  of  baJrren  wethers 
there  are  lambs  and  sheep,  that  is,  h  weaker  and  stronger 

c  Bellarm.    de   Rom.  Pont.    lib.  iv.  h  And  this  seems  to  fp.e  to  allude  to 

cap.  8.  that  of  St.  Paul,  i  Cor.  Hi.  2.  and  Heb. 

d  John  xi.  42.  v.  1 2,  some  are  fed  ivith  milk,  and  some 

e  Donum  hoc  loco  Petro  impetratum,  with   stronger  meat ;    the   lambs   with 

etiam  ad  successores  pertinet.   Bellarm.  milk,  and  the  sheep  with  stronger  meat. 

de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  cap.  3.  §.  Quarto,  But  here  A.  C.  follows  pope  Hildebrand 

donum  hoc.  ^  close,  who  in  the  case  of  the  emperor 

f  John  xxi.  15,  1 6.  then  asked  this  qiiestion  :  Quando  Chri- 

&  Matt,  xxviii.  19;    and  x.  16.  the  stus  ecclesiam  suam  Petro  commisit,  et 

same  power  and  charge   is    given   to  dixit,  Pasce  oves  meas,  excepitne  reges  ? 

all.  Platin.  in  Vita  Greg.  VII.  And  certainly 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  159 

Christians ;  not  people  and  pastors,  subjects  and  governors,  Sect.  25. 
as  A.  C.  expounds  it,  to  bring  the  necks  of  princes  under 
Roman  pride :  and  if  kings  be  meant,  yet  then  the  command 
is  pasce,  feed  them;  but  deponere  or  occidere,  to  depose  or  j 
kill  them,  is  not  pascere  in  any  sense ;  lanii  id  est,  non  pasto- 
m,  that  is  the  butcher's,  not  the  shepherd's  part :  if  a  sheep 
go  astray  never  so  far,  it  is  not  the  shepherd's  part  to  kill 
him ;  at  least  if  he  do,  non  pascit  dum  occidit,  he  doth  not 
certainly  feed  while  he  kills. 

XVIII. — And  for  the  close,  "That  the  bishop  of  Rome  A.  C.  p.  58. 
shall  never  refuse  to  feed  and  govern  the  whole  flock  in  such 
sort,  as  that  neither  particular  man  nor  church  shall  have 
just  cause,  under  pretence  of  reformation  in  manners  or  faith, 
to  make  a  separation  from  the  whole  church ;"  by  A.  C.'s 
favour,  this  is  mere  begging  of  the  question.  He  says  the 
pope  shall  ever  govern  the  whole  church  so  as  that  there 
shall  be  no  just  cause  given  of  a  separation.  And  that  is  the 
very  thing  which  the  protestants  charge  upon  him,  namely, 
that  he  hath  governed,  if  not  the  whole,  yet  so  much  of  the 
church  as  he  hath  been  able  to  bring  under  his  power,  so  as 
that  he  hath  given  too  just  cause  of  the  present  continued 
separation.  And  as  the  corruptions  in  the  doctrine  of  faith 
in  the  church  of  Rome  were  the  cause  of  the  first  separation, 
so  are  they  at  this  present  day  the  cause  why  this  separation 
continues.  And  further,  I  for  my  part  am  clear  of  opinion, 
that  the  errors  in  the  doctrine  of  faith  which  are  charged 
upon  the  whole  church,  at  least  so  much  of  the  whole  as  in 
these  parts  of  Europe  hath  been  kept  under  the  Roman  juris- 
diction, have  had  their  original  and  continuance  from  this, 
that  so  much  of  the  universal  church  (which  indeed  they 
account  all)  hath  forgotten  her  own  liberty,  and  submitted  to 
the  Roman  church  and  bishop,  and  so  is  in  a  manner  forced 
to  embrace  all  the  corruptions  which  the  particular  church  of 
Rome  hath  contracted  upon  itself;  and  being  now  not  able 
to  free  herself  from  the  Roman  jurisdiction,  is  made  to  con- 
tinue also  in  all  her  corruptions.  And  for  the  protestants, 
they  have  made  no  separation  from  the  general  church,  pro- 
perly so  called,  (for  therein  A.  C.  said  well,  the  pope's  A.  c.  p.  58, 

kings  are  not  exempted  from  being  fed     of  their  kingdoms  by  any  churchmen, 
by  the  church,  but  from  being  spoiled     that  they  are. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect. 25, 26. administration  can  give  no  cause  to  separate  from  that;)  but 
their  separation  is  only  from  the  church  of  Rome,  and  such 
other  churches  as  by  adhering  to  her  have  hazarded  them- 
selves, and  do  now  miscall  themselves  the  whole  catholic 
church:  nay,  even  here  the  protestants  have  not  left  the 
church  of  Rome  in  her  essence,  but  in  her  errors,  not  in  the 
things  which  constitute  a  church,  but  only  in  such  abuses  and 
corruptions  as  work  toward  the  dissolution  of  a  church. 

jf .  I  also  asked  who  ought  to  judge  in  this  case :  the  $3, 

said,  a  general  council. 

Sect.  26.  2$.  I. — And  surely  what  greater  or  surer  judgment  you 
can  have,  where  sense  of  scripture  is  doubted,  than  a  general 
A.  C.  p.  59.  council,  I  do  not  see,  nor  do  you  doubt.  And  A.  C.  grants 
it  to  be  "a  most  competent  judge  of  all  controversies  of  faith, 
so  that  all  pastors  be  gathered  together,  and  in  the  name  of 
Christ,  and  pray  unanimously  for  the  promised  assistance  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  make  great  and  diligent  search  and 
examination  of  the  scriptures  and  other  grounds  of  faith,  and 
then  decree  what  is  to  be  held  for  divine  truth ;  for  then," 
saith  he,  "it  is  firm  and  infallible,  or  else  there  is  nothing 
firm  upon  earth."  As  fair  as  this  passage  seems,  and  as 
freely  as  I  have  granted  that  a  general  council  is  the  best 
judge  on  earth,  where  the  sense  of  scripture  is  doubted,  yet 
even  in  this  passage  there  are  some  things  considerable.  As, 
first,  when  shall  the  church  hope  for  such  a  general  council, 
in  which  all  pastors  shall  be  gathered  together?  There  was 
never  any  such  general  council  yet,  nor  do  I  believe  such  can 
be  had ;  so  that  is  supposed  in  vain ;  and  you  might  have 
learned  this  of  iBellarmine,  if  you  will  not  belie\e  me.  Next, 
saith  he,  t;  If  all  these  pastors  pray  unanimously  for  the 
promised  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  Why,  but  if  all 
pastors  cannot  meet  together,  all  cannot  pray  together,  nor 
all  search  the  scriptures  together,  nor  all  upon  that  search 
decree  together :  so  that  is  supposed  in  vain  too,  Yea  but, 
thirdly,  "  If  all  that  meet  do  pray  unanimously" — What  then  \ 
all  that  meet  are  not  simply  all ;  nor  doth  the  Holy  Ghost 
come  and  give  his  assistance  upon  every  prayer  that  is  made 

i   Si    omnes,   nullum    fuit  bactenus     tur  deinceps  futurum.    Bellarm.  i.  de 
concilium  generate,  neque  etiam  vide-     Concil.  cap.  17.  §.  i. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


unanimously,  though  by  very  many  prelates  or  other  faithful  Sect.  26. 
people  met  together,  unless  all  other  requisites,  as  well  as 
unanimity,  to  make  their  prayer  to  be  heard  and  granted, 
be  observed  by  them :  so  that  an  unanimous  prayer  is  not 
adequately  supposed,  and  therefore  concludes  not.  But, 
lastly,  how  far  a  general  council,  if  all  A.  C.'s  conditions  be 
observed,  is  firm  and  infallible,  that  shall  be  more  fully  dis- 
cussed Jat  after.  In  the  mean  time,  these  two  words  firm 
and  infallible  are  ill  put  together  as  synonymas:  for  there 
are  some  things  most  infallible  in  themselves,  which  yet  could 
never  get  to  be  made  firm  among  men ;  and  there  are  many 
things  made  firm  by  law,  both  in  churches  and  kingdoms, 
which  yet  are  not  infallible  in  themselves:  so  to  draw  all 
together,  to  settle  controversies  in  the  church,  here  is  a  visible 
judge  and  infallible,  but  not  living,  and  that  is  the  k scripture 

j  Sect.  33.  consid.  J. 

k  And  this  was  thought  a  sufficient 
judge  too,  when  Christians  were  as 
humble  as  learned.  I  am  sure  Optatus 
thought  so.  Quaerendi  sunt  judices.  Si 
Christiani  de  utraque  parte  dari  non 
possunt,  quia  studiis  veritas  impeditur. 
De  foris  quaerendus  est  judex.  Si  paga- 
nus,  non  potest  nosse  Christiana  secreta. 
Si  Judaeus,  inimicus  est  Christiani  bap- 
tismatis.  Ergo  in  terris  de  hac  re  nul- 
lum  poterit  reperiri  judicium.  De  crelo 
quaerendus  est  judex.  Sed  ut  quid  pul- 
samus  ad  co3lurn  quum  habemus  hie 
evangelio  ?  Testamentum  (inquam,  quia 
hoc  loco  recte  possunt  terrena  coelesti- 
bus  comparari)  tale  est,  quod  quivis 
hominum  habens  numerosos  filios,  his 
quamdiu  pater  praesens  est,  ipse  imperat 
singulis ;  non  est  adhuc  riecessarium 
testamentum ;  sic  et  Christus  prsesens 
in  terris  fuit,  (quamvis  nee  modo  desit) 
pro  tempore  quicquid  necessarium  erat- 
apostolis  imperavit.  Sed  quomodo  ter- 
renus  pater  dum  se  in  confinio  senserit 
mortis,  timens  ne  post  mortem  suam, 
rupta  pace  litigent  fratres,  adhibitis  tes- 
tibus  voluntatem  suam  de  pectore  mori- 
turo,  transfert  in  tabulas  diu  duraturas. 
Et  si  fuerit  inter  fratres  contentio  nata, 
non  itur  ad  tumulum,  sed  quaeritur 
testamentum ;  et  qui  tumulo  quiescit, 
tacitus  de  tabulis  loquitur.  Vivus,  cujus 
est  testamentum,  in  crelo  est.  Ergo  vo- 
luntas  ejus,  velut  in  testarnento,  sic  in 
evangelio  inquiratur.  Optat.  adv.  Farm, 
lib.  v. 

This  pregnant  place  of  Optatus, "  That 

the  scripture  is  the  judge  of  divine  truth 
whenever  it  is  questioned,"  though  Bald- 
win dare  not  deny,  yet  he  would  fain 
slide  both  by  it,  and  by  a  parallel  place 
as  full  in  S.  August,  in  Psal.  xxi.  expo- 
sitioue  2,  with  this  shift,  that  St.  Au- 
gustine in  another  place  had  rather  use 
the  testimony  of  tradition,  that  is,  the 
testimony  nuncupativi  potius  quam  scrip- 
ti  testamenti,  of  the  nuncupative  rather 
than  the  tvritten  will  of  Christ.  Bald- 
win, in  Optat.  lib.  v.  But  this  is  a 
mere  shift.  First,  because  it  is  petitio 
principii,  the  mere  begging  of  the  ques- 
tion ;  for  we  deny  any  testament  of 
Christ  but  that  which  is  written  :  and 
A.  C.  cannot  shew  it  in  any  one  Father 
of  the  church  that  Christ  ever  left  be- 
hind him  a  nuncupative  obligatory  will. 
Secondly,  because  nothing  is  more  plain 
in  these  two  Fathers,  Optatus  and  St. 
Augustine,  than  that  both  of  them  ap- 
peal to  the  written  will,  and  make  that 
the  judge  without  any  exception,  when 
a  matter  of  faith  comes  in  question. 
In  Optatus  the  words  are,  Habemus  in 
evangelio,  we  have  it  in  the  gospel; 
and,  In  evangelio  inquiratur,  let  it  be 
inquired  in  the  gospel ;  and  Christ  put 
it  in  tabulas  diu  duraturas,  into  written 
and  lasting  instruments.  In  St.  Au- 
gustine the  words  are,  "  Our  Father 
did  not  die  intestate,"  &c. ;  and,  Tabulae 
aperiantur,  let  his  written  instruments 
be  opened ;  and,  Legantur  verba  mor- 
tui,  let  the  words  of  him  that  died  be 
read  :  and  again,  Aperi,  legamus,  open 
the  will,  and  let  us  read ;  and,  Lega- 


Ifiv  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  pronouncing  by  the  church ;  and  there  is  a  visible  and  a  living 
judge,  but  not  infallible,  and  that  is  a  general  council,  law- 
fully called  and  so  proceeding.  But  I  know  no  formal  con- 
firmation of  it  needful,  (though  A.  C.  Require  it,)  but  only 
that  after  it  is  ended  the  whole  church  admit  it,  be  it  never 
so  tacitly. 

A.  C.  p.  59,  II. — In  the  next  place.  A.  C.  interposes  new  matter  quite 
out  of  the  conference.  And  first,  in  case  of  distraction  and 
disunion  in  the  church,  he  would  know  what  is  to  be  done 
to  reunite,  when  a  general  council  (which  is  acknowledged 
to  be  a  fit  judge)  cannot  be  had  by  reason  of  manifold  impe- 
diments, or  if  being  called,  will  not  be  of  one  mind.  "  Hath 
Christ  our  Lord,"  saith  he,  "  in  this  case  provided  no  rule, 
no  judge,  infallibly  to  determine  controversies,  and  to  procure 
unity  and  certainty  of  belief?  Indeed  the  protestants  admit 
no  infallible  means,  rule,  or  judge,  but  only  scripture,  which 
every  man  may  interpret  as  he  pleaseth,  and  so  all  shall  be 
uncertain."  Truly,  I  must  confess,  there  are  many  impedi- 
ments to  hinder  the  calling  of  a  general  council.  You  know 
in  the  ancient  church  there  was  mhinderance  enough,  and 
what  hurt  it  wrought ;  and  afterward,  though  it  were  long 
first,  there  was  provision  made  for  "frequent  calling  of  coun- 

mus,  quid  litigamus  ?  why  do  we  strive  ?  else  the  general  council  is  invalid,  is  one 

let  us  read  the  will :  and  again,  Aperi  of  the  Roman  novelties  ;  for  this  cannot 

testamentum,  lege,  open  the  will,  read,  be  shewed  in  any  antiquity  void  of  just 

All  which  passages   are   most  express  exception.     The  truth  is,  the  pope,  as 

and  full  for  his  written  will,  and  not  other  patriarchs  and  great  bishops  used 

for  any  nuncupative  will,  as  Baldwin  to  do,  did  give  his  assent  to  such  coun- 

would  put  upon  us.     And  Hart,  who  cils  as  he  approved ;  but  that  is  no  cor- 

takes  the  same  way  with  Baldwin,  is  roboration  of  the  council,  as  if  it  were 

not  able  to  make  it  out,  as  appears  by  invalid  without  it,  but  a  declaration  of 

Dr.  Reynolds,  in  his  Conference  with  his  consenting  with  the  rest.    Sect.  33. 

Hart,  c.  8.  divis.  i.  p.  396,  &c.  consid.  4.  num.  VI. 

1  Sect.  28.  num.  I.     And  so  plainly  m  Christianitas  in  diversas   haereses 

St.  Augustine,  speaking  of  St.  Cyprian's  scissa  est,  quia  non  erat  licentia  episco- 

error  about  rebaptization,  &c.,  says,  Illis  pis    in   unum    convenire,    persecutione 

temporibus   antequam    plenarii   concilii  saeviente  usque  ad  tempora  Constantini, 

sententia   quid   in   hac   re    sequendum  &c.  Isidor.  Concil.  ed.  Venet. 

esset,  totius   ecclesiae   consensio  confir-  1585. 

masset,  Visum  est  ei  cum,  &c.  De  Bapt.  n  Frequens  generalium  conciliorum 
cont.  Donat.  lib.  i.  c.  18.  So  here  is  celebratio  est  praecipua  cultura  agri  Do- 
first  "  sententia  concilii ;"  and  then  the  minici,  &c.  Et  illorum  neglectus  erro- 
confirmation  of  it  is  "  totius  ecclesiae  res,  haereses,  et  schismata  disseminat. 
consensio,"  the  consent  of  the  whole  Haec  praeteritorum  temporum  recordatio 
church  yielding  unto  it.  And  so  Ger-  et  praesentium  consideratio  ante  oculos 
son,  Concurrente  universali  totius  eccle-  nostros  ponunt.  Itaque  sancimus,  ut 
siae  consensu,  &c.  In  declaratione  veri-  a  modo  concilia  generalia  celebrentur ; 
tatem  quae  credendae  sunt,  &c.  §.  4.  For  ita  quod  primum  a  fine  hujus  concilii 
this,  That  the  pope  must  confirm  it,  or  in  quinquennium  immediate  sequens, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  163 

cils,  and  yet  no  age  since  saw  them  called  according  to  that  Sect.  26. 
provision  in  every  circumstance  :  therefore  impediments  there 
were  enough,  or  else  some  declined  them  wilfully,  though 
there  were  no  impediments.  Nor  will  I  deny  but  that  when 
they  were  called,  there  were  as  many  °  practices  to  disturb  or 
pervert  the  councils ;  and  these  practices  were  able  to  keep 
many  councils  from  being  all  of  one  mind :  but  if  being  called 
they  will  not  be  of  one  mind,  I  cannot  help  that ;  though 
that  very  not  agreeing  is  a  shrewd  sign  that  the  other  spirit 
hath  a  party  there  against  the  Holy  Ghost. 

III. — Now  A.C.  would  know  what  is  to  be  done  for  reuniting 
of  a  church  divided  in  doctrine  of  the  faith,  when  this  remedy 
by  a  general  council  cannot  be  had  :  "  Sure  Christ  our  Lord," 
saith  he,  "  hath  provided  some  rule,  some  judge,  in  such  and 
such  like  cases,  to  procure  unity  and  certainty  of  belief."  I 
believe  so  too ;  for  he  hath  left  an  infallible  rule,  the  scrip- 
ture ;  and  that,  by  the  manifest  places  in  it  (which  need  no 
dispute,  no  external  judge),  is  Pable  to  settle  unity  and  cer- 
tainty of  belief  in  necessaries  to  salvation :  and  in  non  neces- 
sariis,  in  and  about  things  not  necessary,  there  ought  not  to 
be  a  contention  to  a  q  separation. 

IV. — And  therefore  A.  C.  does  not  well  to  make  that  a 
crime,  that  the  protestants  admit  no  infallible  rule  but  the 
scripture  only,  or,  as  he  (I  doubt,  not  without  some  scorn) 
terms  it,  beside  only  scripture;  for  what  need  is  there  of 
another,  since  this  is  most  infallible,  and  the  same  which  the 
r  ancient  church  of  Christ  admitted  I  And  if  it  were  sufficient 

senindum  vero  a  fine  illius  in  septen-  P  Non  per  difficiles  nos  Deus  ad  bea- 

nium,  et  deinceps  de  decennio  in  decen-  tarn    vitam   quaestiones  vocat,  &c.     In 

nium  perpetuo  celebrentur,  &c.    Concil.  absolute  nobis  et  facili  est  seternitas ; 

Constant.   Sess.  39. — Et  apud  Gerson.  Jesum  suscitatum  a  mortals  per  Deum 

Tom.   p.  230.  et  Pet.  de  Aliaco  Card,  credere,  et  ipsum  esse  Dominum  confi- 

Cameracensis  libellum  obtulit  in  Concil.  teri,  &c.    S.  Hilar.  de  Trin.  lib.  x.  ad 

Constant,  de  reformatione  ecclesife  con-  finem. 

tra  opinionem  eorum  qui  putarunt  con-  q  Cyprianus  et  collegae  ipsius  creden- 

cilia   generalia   minus   necessaria   esse,  tes  haereticos  et  schismaticos  baptismum 

quia  omnia  bene  a  patribus  nostris  or-  non  habere,  sine  baptismo  receptis,  &c. 

dinata  sunt,  &c.    In  fascic.  Rerum  ex-  iis  tamen  communicare  quam  separari 

petendarum,  fol.  28.     Et  schismatibns  ab  imitate  maluerunt.     S.  August,   de 

debet  ecclesia  cito  per  concilia  generalia     Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  lib.  ii.  c.  6 Et  hi 

provideri,  ut  in  primitiva  ecclesia  docu-  non  contaminabant  Cyprianum.     Ibid, 

erunt  apostoli,  ut  Act.  vi.  et  Act.  xv.  fine. 

Ibid.  fol.  204.  A.  r  Recensuit  cuncta  sanctis  scripturis 

o  In  concil.  Ariminensi  multis  pan-  consona.     Euseb.  Hist.  lib.  v.  c.  20.  de 

corum  fraude  deceptis,  &c.    S.  August.  Frenaeo.      Regula    principalis    de    qua 

contra  Maximinum,  lib.  iii.  c.  14.  Paracletus   agnitus.    Tert.  de  Monog. 

M  2 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  for  the  ancient  church,  to  guide  them  and  direct  their  coun- 
cils why  should  it  be  now  held  insufficient  for  us,  at  least 
till  a  free  general  council  may  be  had?  And  it  hath  both 
the  conditions  which  sBellarmine  requires  to  a  rule,  namely, 
that  it  be  certain,  and  that  it  be  known ;  "for  if  it  be  not 
certain,  it  is  no  rule,  and  if  it  be  not  known,  it  is  no  rule  to  us." 
Now  the  t Romanists  dare  not  deny  but  this  rule  is  certain; 
and  that  it  is  sufficiently  known  in  the  manifest  places  of  it, 
and  such  as  are  necessary  to  salvation,  none  of  the  ancients 
did  ever  deny ;  so  there  is  an  infallible  rule. 

V. — Nor  need  there  be  such  fear  of  a  private  spirit  in 
these  manifest  things,  which  being  but  read  or  heard,  teach 
themselves.  Indeed,  you  Romanists  had  need  of  some  other 
judge,  and  he  a  propitious  one,  to  crush  the  pope's  more 
powerful  principality  out  of  Pasce  oves,  Feed  my  sheep.  And 
yet  this  must  be  the  meaning,  (if  you  will  have  it,)  whether 
u  Gideon's  fleece  be  wet  or  dry,  that  is,  whether  there  be  dew 
enough  in  the  text  to  water  that  sense  or  no.  But,  I  pray, 
when  God  hath  left  his  church  this  infallible  rule,  what  war- 
rant have  you  to  seek  another?  you  have  shewed  us  none 

c.  2.  And  this  is  true,  though  the  au- 
thor spake  it  when  he  was  lapsed. — 
Ipsas  scripturas  apprime  teneris.  S.  Hie- 
ron.  ad  Marcellum  advers.  Montanum, 
torn.  ii.  —  Hoc  quia  de  scripturis  non 
habet  authoritatem,  eadem  facilitate 
contemnitur,  qua  probatur.  S.  Hieron. 
in  S.  Matth.  c.  xxiii. 

Manifestus  est  fidei  lapsus,  et  liqui- 
dum  superbiae  vitium,  vel  respuere  ali- 
quid  eorum  quae  scriptura  habet,  vel 
inducere  quicquam  quod  scriptum  non 
est.  S.  Basil.  Serm.  de  Fide,  torn.  ii. 
p.  154.  edit.  Basileae,  1565. 

Contra  insurgentes  haereses  ssepe  pug- 
navi  agraphis,  verum  non  alienis  a  pi  a 
secundum  scripturam  sententia.  Ibid. 

P-  »53- 

And  before  Basil,  Tertullian :  Adoro 
scripturae  plenitudinem,  &c.  si  non  est 
scriptum,  timeat  Hermogenes.  Vae  illud 
adjicientibus  vel  detrahentibus  destina- 
tum.  Tertull.  adv.  Hermog.  c.  22. 

And  Pauliuus  plainly  calls  it  "  regu- 
lum  directionis,"  epist,  23. 

De  hac  regula  tria  observanda  sunt. 

1 .  Regula  est,  sed  a  tern  pore  quo  scripta. 

2.  Regula  est,  sed  per  ecclesiam  appli- 
canda,    non    per    privatum    spiritum. 

3.  Regula  est,  et  mensurat  omnia  quae 

continet:  continet  autem  omnia  neces- 
saria  ad  salutem,  vel  mediate  vel  imme- 
diate. Et  hoc  tertium  habet  Biel.  iu 
3.  D.  25.  q.  unica.  Conclus.  4.  M.  And 
this  is  all  we  say.  Hooker,  Eccles.  Pol. 
b.  v.  §.  22. 

s  Regula  catholic*  fidei  debet  esse 
certa  et  nota.  Si  certa  non  sit,  non 
erit  regula.  Si  nota  non  sit,  non  erit 
regula  nobis.  Bellarm.  de  Verbo  Dei, 
lib.  i.  c.  2.  §.  5. — Sed  nihil  est  vel  cer- 
tius  vel  notius  sacra  scriptura.  Bellarm. 
ibid.  §.  6. — Therefore  the  holy  scripture 
is  the  rule  of  catholic  faith,  both  in  it- 
self and  to  us  also ;  for  in  things  simply 
necessaiy  to  salvation  it  is  abundantly 
known  and  manifest;  as  §.  16.  num.  V. 

t  Convenit  inter  nos  et  omnes  omnino 
haereticos,  verbum  Dei  esse  regulam 
fidei,  ex  qua  de  dogmatibus  judicandum 
sit.  Bellarm.  Praefat.  torn.  i.  fine.  And 
although  there,  perhaps,  he  includes 
traditions,  yet  that  was  never  proved 
yet :  neither  indeed  can  he  include 
traditions ;  for  he  speaks  of  that  word 
of  God  upon  which  all  heretics  consent : 
but  concerning  traditions,  they  all  con- 
sent not  that  they  are  a  rule  of  faith ; 
therefore  he  speaks  not  of  them. 

u  Judg.  vi. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  165 

yet,  whatever  you  think  you  have.     And  I  hope  A.  C.  cannot  Sect.  26. 
think  it  follows,  that  Christ  our  Lord  hath  provided  no  rule 
to  determine  necessary  controversies,  because  he  hath  not 
provided  the  rule  which  he  would  have. 

VI. — Besides,  let  there  be  such  a  living  judge  as  A.  C. 
would  have,  and  let  the  xpope  be  he,  yet  that  is  not  sufficient, 
against  the  malice  of  the  devil  and  impious  men,  to  keep  the 
church  at  all  times  from  renting,  even  in  the  doctrine  of 
faith,  or  to  solder  the  rents  which  are  made ;  for  Voportet  esse 
hcereses,  heresies  there  will  be,  and  heresies  properly  there 
cannot  be  but  in  doctrine  of  the  faith.  And  what  will  A.  0. 
in  this  case  do?  Will  he  send  Christ  our  Lord  to  provide 
another  rule  than  the  decision  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  because 
he  can  neither  make  unity  nor  certainty  of  belief?  And  (as 
it  is  most  apparent)  he  cannot  do  it  de  facto,  so  neither  hath 
he  power  from  Christ  over  the  whole  church  to  do  it ;  nay, 
out  of  all  doubt,  it  is  not  the  least  reason  why  de  facto  he 
hath  so  little  success,  because  de  jure  he  hath  no  power  given. 
But  since  A.  C.  requires  another  judge  besides  the  scripture, 
and  in  cases  when  either  the  time  is  so  difficult  that  a  general 
council  cannot  be  called,  or  the  council  so  set  that  they  will 
not  agree,  let  us  see  how  he  proves  it. 

VII. — It  is  thus:  "Every  earthly  kingdom,"  saith  he,  A.  C.  p.  60. 
"  when  matters  cannot  be  composed  by  a  parliament,  (which 
cannot  be  called  upon  all  occasions" — why  doth  he  not  add 
here,  '  and  which  being  called  will  not  always  be  of  one  mind,1 
as  he  did  add  it  in  case  of  the  council  ?)  "  hath,  besides  the 
law-books,  some  living  magistrates  and  judges,  and,  above  all, 
one  visible  king,  the  highest  judge,  who  hath  authority  suffi- 
cient to  end  all  controversies,  and  settle  unity  in  all  temporal 
affairs.  And  shall  we  think  that  Christ,  the  wisest  King, 
hath  provided  in  his  kingdom  the  church,  only  the  law-books 
of  the  holy  scripture,  and  no  living  visible  judges,  and 
above  all,  one  chief,  so  assisted  by  his  Spirit  as  may  suffice 
to  end  all  controversies  for  unity  and  certainty  of  faith? 
which  can  never  be,  if  every  man  may  interpret  holy  scrip- 
ture, the  law-books,  as  he  list."  This  is  a  very  plausible 
argument  with  the  many ;  but  the  foundation  of  it  is  but  a 

x  For  so  he  affirms,  p.  58.  y  i  Cor.  xi.  19. 

16(5  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  z  similitude ;  and  if  the  similitude  hold  not  in  the  main,  the 
argument  is  nothing;  and  so  I  doubt  it  will  prove  here.  I 
will  observe  particulars  as  they  lie  in  order. 

VIII. — And  first,  he  will  have  the  whole  militant  church 
(for  of  that  we  speak)  a  kingdom.  But  this  is  not  certain  ; 
for  they  are  no  mean  ones  which  think  our  Saviour  Christ  left 
the  church  militant  in  the  hands  of  the  apostles  and  their 
successors  in  an  aristocratical,  or  rather  a  mixed  government ; 
and  that  the  church  is  not  a  monarchical  otherwise  than  the 
triumphant  and  militant  make  one  body  under  Christ  the 
head.  And  in  this  sense  indeed,  and  in  this  only,  the  church 
is  a  most  absolute  kingdom  ;  and  the  very  expressing  of  this 
sense  is  a  full  answer  to  all  the  places  of  scripture  and  other 
arguments  brought  by  bBellarmine  to  prove  that  the  church 
is  a  monarchy.  But  the  church  being  as  large  as  the  world, 
Christ  thought  it  fitter  to  govern  it  aristocratically  by  divers, 
rather  than  by  one  viceroy.  And  I  believe  this  is  true  :  for 
all  the  time  of  the  first  three  hundred  years  and  somewhat 
better,  it  was  governed  aristocratically,  if  we  will  impartially 
consider  how  the  bishops  of  those  times  carried  the  whole 
business  of  admitting  any  new  consecrated  bishops  or  others 
to,  or  rejecting  them  from  their  communion.  For  I  have 
carefully  examined  this  for  the  first  six  hundred  years,  even 
to  and  within  the  time  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  cwho  in 

z  Quae  subtilissime  de  hoc  disputari  Rhegii,  sive  Alexandras,  siveTanis;  ejus- 
possnnt,  ita  ut  non  similitudinihus  quae  dem  meriti,  ejusdem  est  et  sacerdotii. 
plerumque  fallunt  sed  rebus  ipsis  satis-  S.  Hieron.  Epist.  ad  Evagrium — doubt- 
fiat,  &c.  S.  August,  lib.  de  Quant,  less  he  thought  not  of  the  Roman 
Animae,  cap.  32.  Whereupon  the  logi-  bishop's  monarchy.  For  what  bishop 
cians  tell  us  rightly,  that  this  is  a  fal-  is  of  the  same  merit  or  of  the  same  de- 
lacy,  unless  it  be  taken  reduplicative,  gree  in  the  priesthood  with  the  pope, 
i.  e.  de  similibus  quae  similia  sunt.  And  as  things  are  now  carried  at  Rome  ? 
hence  Aristotle  himself,  2  Top.  Loc.  32,  Affirmamus  etiam,  Patribus  et  Graecis 
says,  ir&Kiv  eTrl  T<av  d/jLoiow,  fl  6/iotws  et  Latinis,  ignotas  esse  voces  de  Petro 
«%et.  Rursum  in  similibus,  si  similiter  aut  papa,  monarcha  et  monarchia. 
se  habent.  Nam  quod  in  superioribus  observaba- 

a  When   Gerson  writ  his   tract  De  mus  reperiri  eas  dictiones  positas  pro 

AuTeribilitate    Papae,   sure  he  thought  episcopo,   et   episcopatu,    nihil   hoc   ad 

the  church  might  continue  in  a  very  rem  facit.     Isa.  Casaub.,  Exercitatione 

good  being  without  a  monarchical  head  :  15.   ad  Annales  Eccles.  Baron.  §.    12. 

therefore  in  his  judgment  the  church  p.  378.  et  §.  n.  p.  360,  diserte  assent 

is  not  by  any  command  or  institution  et  probat  ecclesiae  regimen  aristocrati- 

of  Christ  monarchical.     Gerson.  par.  i.  cum  fuisse. 

P-  !54-  b  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  16. 

When  St.  Hierome  wrote  thus — Ubi-  §.  i,  2,  3. 

cuiique    fuerit    episcopus,   sive   Romae,  «  S.  Greg.  lib.  ix.  epist.  58.   et  lib. 

sive  Eugubii,  sive  Constantinopoli,  sive  xii.  epist.  15. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  167 

the  beginning  of  the  seventh  hundred  year  sent  such  letters  Sect.  26. 
to  Augustine  then  archbishop  .of  Canterbury,  and  to  dQuiri- 
nus  and  other  bishops  in  Ireland ;  and  I  find  that  the  literce 
communicator  ice,  which  certified  from  one  great  patriarch  to 
another,  who  were  fit  or  unfit  to  be  admitted  to  their  com- 
munion, if  they  upon  any  occasion  repaired  to  their  sees,  were 
sent  mutually,  and  as  freely  and  in  the  same  manner  from 
Rome  to  the  other  patriarchs  as  from  them  to  it.  Out  of 
which,  I  think,  this  will  follow  most  directly,  That  the  church 
government  then  was  aristocratical :  for  had  the  bishop  of 
Rome  been  then  accounted  sole  monarch  of  the  church,  and 
been  put  into  the  definition  of  the  church,  (as  he  is  now  by 
eBellarmine,)  all  these  communicatory  letters  should  have 
been  directed  from  him  to  the  rest,  as  whose  admittance 
ought  to  be  a  rule  for  all  to  communicate;  but  not  from 
others  to  him,  or  at  least  not  in  that  even,  equal,  and  bro- 
therly way  as  now  they  appear  to  be  written.  For  it  is  no 
way  probable  that  the  bishops  of  Rome,  which  even  then 
sought  their  own  greatness  too  much,  would  have  submitted 
to  the  other  patriarchs  voluntarily,  had  not  the  very  course 
of  the  church  put  it  upon  them. 

IX. — Besides,  this  is  a  great  and  undoubted  rule  given  by 
fOptatus,  That  wheresoever  there  is  a  church,  there  the 
"  church  is  in  the  commonwealth,  not  the  commonwealth  in  the 
church :  and  so  also  the  church  was  in  the  Roman  empire.11 
Now  from  this  ground  I  argue  thus  :  If  the  church  be  within 
the  empire  or  other  kingdom,  it  is  impossible  the  government 
of  the  church  should  be  monarchical.  For  no  emperor  or 
king  will  endure  another  king  within  his  dominion  that  shall 
be  greater  than  himself,  since  the  very  enduring  it  makes  him 
that  endures  it  upon  the  matter  no  monarch.  Nor  will  it 
disturb  this  argument,  that  two  great  kings  in  France  and 
Spain  permit  this.  For  he  that  is  not  blind  may  see,  if  he 
will,  of  what  little  value  the  pope's  power  is  in  those  kingdoms, 
further  than  to  serve  their  own  turns  of  him,  which  they  do 
to  their  great  advantage.  Nay  further,  the  ancient  canons 
and  Fathers  of  the  church  seem  to  me  plain  for  this;  for 

d  S.  Greg.  lib.  ix.  epist.  61.  f  Non  enim  respublica  est  in  ecclesia: 

e  Bellarm.  de  Eccles.  lib.  iii.  c.  2.  §.     sed  ecclesia  in  republica,  i.  e.  inimperio 
Nostra  autem.  Romano.  Optat.  lib.  iii. 


168  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  the  s  council  of  Antioch  submits  ecclesiastical  causes  to  the 
bishops ;  and  what  was  done  amiss  by  a  bishop  was  corri- 
gible by  ah  synod  of  bishops,  but  this  with  the1  metropolitan; 
and  in  case  these  did  not  agree,  thek  metropolitan  might  call 
in  other  bishops  out  of  the  neighbouring  provinces  ;  and  if 
things  settled  not  this  way,  a  general  council  (J  under  the 
scripture,  and  directed  by  it)  was  the  highest  remedy.  And 
mSt.  Cyprian,  even  to  pope  Cornelius  himself,  says  plainly, 
"  that  to  every  bishop  is  ascribed  a  portion  of  the  flock  for  him 
to  govern  ;"  and  so  not  all  committed  to  one  :  in  all  this  the 
government  of  the  church  seems  plainly  aristocratical.  And 
if  all  other  arguments  fail,  we  have  one  left  from  Bellarmine, 
who  opposes  it  as  much  as  any,  "twice  for  failing ;  and  yet 
where  he  goes  to  exclude  secular  princes  from  church-govern- 
ment, °all  his  quotations  and  all  his  proofs  run  upon  this 
head,  to  shew  that  the  government  of  the  church  was  ever  in 
the  bishops.  What  saysP  A.  C.  now  to  the  confession  of  this 
great  adversary,  and  in  this  great  point,  extorted  from  him 
by  force  of  truth  ?  Now  if  this  be  true,  then  the  whole  foun- 
dation of  this  argument  is  gone ;  the  church  militant  is  no 
kingdom,  and  therefore  not  to  be  compared  or  judged  by  one  : 
the  resemblance  will  not  hold. 

X. — Next,  suppose  it  a  kingdom,  yet  the  church  militant 
remaining  one  is  spread  in  many  earthly  kingdoms,  and  can- 
not well  be  ordered  like  any  one  particular  q  kingdom ;  and 

S  Concil.  Antioch.  c.  9.  p.  507.  gotia  etiam  raajora  omnium  Christiano- 

h  Concil.  Nic.  i.  c.  5.  et  Antioch.  rum.  Turn  quia  minus  malum  est,  ut 

c.  1 2.  populus  partialis  et  parvus  inficiatur  ab 

i  Concil.  Nic.  i.  c.  4.  et  Antioch.  uno  episcopo,  quam  ut  totus,  vel  fere 

Can.  9.  totus  populus  Christianus  inficiatur  ab 

k  Concil.  Antioch.  c.  14.  uno  capite,  quod  omnibus  praesit,  Oc- 

l  Sed praeponitur scriptura.  S.August,  cam.  Dial.  Tract,  i.  lib.  ii.  p.  3.  c.  30. 

de  Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  lib.  ii.  c.  3.  ad  8.  And  besides  this  of  Occam,  to  that 

m  Nam  cum  statutum  sit  omnibus  common  argument,  that  monarchical 

nobis,  &c.  et  singulis  pastoribus  portio  government  is  the  best,  and  therefore 

gregis,  &c.  S.  Cypr.  lib.  i.  ep.  3.  undoubtedly  that  which  Christ  insti- 

n  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  c.  8.  tuted  for  his  church,  it  is  sufficient  to 

et  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  16.  answer,  That  a  monarchy  is  the  best 

0  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  c.  7.  form  of  government  in  one  city  or  coun- 
P  A.  C.  p.  64,  65.  try,  Arist.  Moral,  lib.  viii.  c.   10;  but 

1  Licet  sit  expediens  quod  uni  populo  it  follows  not  that  it  is  the  best  in  re- 
partiali   fideli   praesit   unus    episcopus;  spect   of  the  whole  world,  where   the 
iion   expedit   tamen   quod   toti    populo  parts  are  so  remote  and  the  dispositions 
fideli    praesit   unus    solus.     Turn   quia  of  men  so  various.    And  therefore  Bel- 
omnia    negotia   unius    populi    partialis  larmine  himself  confesses,  Monarchiam 
potest    sustinere    unus    solus :    nullus  aristocratiae    et    democratise    admixtam 
autem  unus  potest  sustinere  omnia  ne-  utiliorem  esse  in  hac  vita,  quam  simplex 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  169 

therefore,  though  in  one  particular  kingdom  there  may  be  Sect.  26. 
many  visible  judges  and  one  supreme,  yet  it  follows  not  that 
in  the  universal  militant  church  there  must  be  one  supreme  ; 
for  how  will,  he  enter  to  execute  his  office,  if  the  kings  of 
those  kingdoms  will  not  give  leave  ? 

XL — Now  here,  though  A.  C.  expresses  himself  no  further, 
yet  I  well  know  what  he  and  his  fellows  would  be  at ;  they 
would  not  be  troubled  to  ask  leave  of  any  several  kings  in 
their  several  dominions.  No ;  they  would  have  one  emperor 
over  all  the  kings,  as  well  as  one  pope  over  all  the  bishops. 
And  then  you  know  rwho  told  us  of  two  great  lights  to  go- 
vern the  world,  the  sun  and  the  moon,  that  is,  the  pope  and 
the  emperor.  At  the  first  it  began  with  more  modesty,  the 
emperor  and  the  pope ;  and  that  was  somewhat  tolerable  : 
for  sSt.  Augustine  tells  us,  ci  That  the  militant  church  is 
often  in  scripture  called  the  moon,  both  for  the  many  changes 
it  hath,  and  for  its  obscurity  in  many  times  of  its  peregrina- 
tion;" and  he  tells  us  too,  that  if  we  will  understand  this 
place  of  scripture  in  a  spiritual  sense,  lour  Saviour  Christ  is 
the  sun,  and  the  militant  church  as  being  full  of  changes  in 
her  estate,  the  moon.  But  now  it  must  be  a  triumphant  church 
here,  militant  no  longer ;  the  pope  must  be  the  sun,  and  the 
emperor  but  the  moon  :  and  lest  Innocent's  own  power  should 
not  be  able  to  make  good  his  decretal,  "Gasper  Schioppius 
doth  not  only  avow  the  allusion  or  interpretation,  but  is 
pleased  to  express  many  circumstances  in  which  he  would  fain 
make  the  world  believe  the  resemblance  holds.  And  lest  any 
man  should  not  know  how  much  the  pope  is  made  greater 
than  the  emperor  by  this  comparison,  the  x  Gloss  furnishes 
us  with  that  too,  and  tells  us,  that  by  this  it  appears,  "  that 

monarchia  est.   De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  i.  num.     Decret.  de  Majoritate  et  Ol>e- 

c.  3.  §.  i.  dientia,  lib.  i.  Tit.  33.  cap.  solitae. 

r  In  the  first  gloss  ascribed  to  Isidore         s  Ecclesia  militans  ssepe  in  scripturis 

in  Gen.  i.  16.  it  is  Per  solem  intelligi-  dicitur  luna,  propter  mutabilitatem,  &c. 

tur  regnum;  per  lunam,  sacerdotium.  S.  August.  Epist.  119.  c.  6. 
But   Innocent   the    Third,   almost   six         l  Intelligimus  spiritualiter  ecclesiam, 

hundred  years  after  Isidore's  death,  per-  &c.     Et  hie  quis  est  sol,  nisi  sol  justi- 

verts   both   text  and   gloss,   thus :  Ad  tiae  ?  &c.     S.  August,  in  Psal.  ciii. 
firmamentum  coeli,  i.  e.  universalis  ec-         u  Gasp.   Schiop.   L.   dicto   Ecclesias- 

clesife,  fecit  Deus  duo  magna  luminaria,  ticus,  c.  145. 

hoc  est,  duas  instituit  potestates,  pon-  x  Igitur  cum  terra  sit  septies  major 
tificalem,  et  regalem,  &c.  Ut  quanta  luna,  sol  autem  octies  major  terra,  re- 
inter  solem  et  lunam,  tanta  inter  pon-  stat  ergo  ut  pontificalis  dignitas  qua- 
tifices  et  reges  differentia  cognoscatur.  dragesies  septies  sit  major  regali  dig- 
Epist.  ad  Imperat.  Constantinopolita-  nitate.  Gloss  in  Decret.  praedict.  Where 

170  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  since  the  earth  is  seven  times  greater  than  the  moon  and 
the  sun  eight  times  greater  than  the  earth,  it  must  needs 
follow  that  the  pope's  power  is  forty-seven  times  greater  than 
the  emperor's  :"  I  like  him  well,  he  will  make  odds  enough. 
But  what,  doth  Innocent  the  Third  give  no  reason  of  this  his 
decretal  ?  Yes.  And  it  is,  saith  he,  "  y  because  the  sun, 
which  rules  in  the  day,  that  is,  in  spiritual  things,  is  greater 
than  the  moon,  which  rules  but  in  the  night,  and  in  carnal 
things.11  But  is  it  possible  that  Innocentius  the  Third,  being 
so  wise  and  so  able  as  zthat  "  nothing  which  he  did,  or  com- 
mended, or  disproved  in  all  his  life,  should  after  his  death  be 
thought  fit  to  be  changed,"  could  think  that  such  an  allusion 
of  spiritual  things  to  the  day  which  the  sun  governs,  and 
worldly  business  to  the  night  which  the  moon  governs,  should 
carry  weight  enough  with  it  to  depress  imperial  power  lower 
than  God  hath  made  it  ?  Out  of  doubt  he  could  not ;  for  he 
well  knew  that  omnis  anima,  every  soul  was  to  be  subject  to 
the  higher  power*,  Rom.  xiii. ;  and  the  b "higher  power  there 
mentioned  is  the  temporal:  and  the  c ancient  Fathers  come 
in  with  a  full  consent,  that  omnis  anima,  every  soul,  compre- 
hends there  all  without  any  exception ;  all  spiritual  men  even 
to  the  highest  bishop,  and  in  spiritual  causes  too,  so  the 
foundations  of  faith  and  good  manners  be  not  shaken ;  and 
where  they  are  shaken  there  ought  to  be  prayer  and  patience, 

first  the  Gloss  is  out  in  his  Latin.     He  et  ipse  textus  subindicat,  &c.  Salmeron, 

might  have  said  quadragies,  for  quadra-  Disput.  4.  in  Rom.  xiii.  §.  Porro  per 

gesies  is  no  word.     Next,  he  is  out  in  potestatem. 

his  arithmetic  ;  for   eight  times  seven         c  nScrt  ravra  StarciTTerat,  /cal  iepevfft, 

makes   not  forty-seven,    but   fifty-six  :  &c.   Omnibus  ista  imperantur,  et  sacer- 

and   then    he    is   much   to    blame   for  dotibus  et  monachis,  &c.     Et  postea : 

drawing  down  the  pope's  power  from  Etiamsi  apostolus  sis,  si  evangelista,  si 

fifty-six    to    forty-seven.     And    lastly,  propheta,  sive  quisquis  tandem  fueris. 

this  allusion  hath  no  ground  of  truth  S.  Chrysost.  Horn.   23.  in  Rom — Sive 

at  all :  for  the  emperor  being  solo  Deo  est  sacerdos,  sive  antistes,  &c.     Theo- 

minor  (Tertul.  ad  Scap.)  cannot  be  a  doret.  in  Rom.  xiii. — Si  omnis  anima, 

moon  to  any  other  sun.  et  vestra.     Quis  vos  excipit  ab  univer- 

Y  Sed  ilia  potestas,  quae  praeest  die-  sitate  ?  &c.     Ipsi  sunt  qui  vobis  dicere 

bus,  i.  e.   in  spiritualibus,  major  est;  solent,  servate  vestrae   sedis   honorem, 

quae  vero  carnalibus,  minor.    Innocent.  &c.     Sed   Christus   aliter  et  jussit,  et 

III.  ubi  supra.  gessit,    &c.     S.   Bern.    Epist.    42.    ad 

z  Ut  post  ejus  mortem,  nihil  eorum  Henricum  Senonensem  archiepiscopum. 

quae  in  hac  vita  egerit,  laudaverit,  aut  Et  Theophylact.  in  Rom.  xiii.,  where 

improbaverit,  immutatum  sit.     Platina  it  is  very  observable  that  Theophylact 

in  vita  ejus.  lived  in  the  time  of  pope  Gregory  the 

a  Rom.  xiii.  i.  Seventh,  and  St.  Bernard  after  it,  and 

b  Patres  veteres,  et  praecipue  August,  yet  this  truth  obtained  then  ;  and  this* 

Epist.    54 — Apostolum   interpretantur  was  about  the  year  1130. 
de  potestate  seculari  tantum  loqui,  quod 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  171 

there  ought  not  to  be  opposition  by  force.  Nay,  he  knew  Sect.  26. 
well  that  d  emperors  and  kings  are  custodes  utriusque  tabulae, 
they  to  whom  the  custody  and  preservation  of  both  tables  of 
the  law  for  worship  to  God  and  duty  to  man  are  committed ; 
that  a  book  of  the  law  was  by  God's  own  command  in  Moses 
his  time  to  be  given  the  kinge ;  that  the  kings  under  that 
law,  but  still  according  to  it,  did  proceed  to  necessary  reform- 
ations in  church  businesses,  and  therein  commanded  the 
very  priests  themselves,  as  appears  in  the  acts  of  fHezekiah 
and  sJosiah,  who  yet  were  never  censured  to  this  day  for 
usurping  the  high  priest's  office.  Nay,  he  knew  full  well  that 
the  greatest  emperors  for  the  church's  honour,  Theodosius 
the  Elder,  and  Justinian,  and  Charles  the  Great,  and  divers 
others,  did  not  only  meddle  now  and  then,  but  did  enact  laws 
to  the  great  settlement  and  increase  of  religion  in  their  seve- 
ral times.  But  then  if  this  could  not  be  the  reason  why 
Innocentius  made  this  strange  allusion,  what  was  2  Why  truly 
I  will  tell  you.  The  pope  was  now  grown  to  a  great  and  £\ 
firm  height ;  h  Gregory  the  Seventh  had  set  the  popedom  \^ 
upon  a  broad  bottom  before  this  Innocent's  time :  so  that 
now  it  is  the  less  wonder  if  he  make  so  bold  with  the  emperor 
as  to  depress  him  as  low  as  the  moon,  upon  no  better  ground 
than  a  groundless  resemblance  ;  but  beside  this  prime  reason, 
there  are  divers  other  which  may  easily  be  drawn  out  of  the 
same  resemblance.  For  since  Innocentius  his  main  aim  was 
to  publish  the  pope's  greatness  over  kings  and  emperors, 

d  An  forte  de  religione  fas  non  est  primae  et  secundae  tabulae,  quod  ad  dis- 

ut  dicat  imperator,  vel  quos  miserit  im-  ciplinam  attinet.  Confessio  Saxonica,  §. 

perator  ?     Cur    ergo    ad    imperatorem  23.  et  Gerardus,  Locorum  torn.  vi.  c.  6. 

vestri  venere  legati  ?     Cur  enim  fece-  §.     5.    membro    i,    probat    ex    Deut. 

runt  causae  suae  judicem,  non  secuturi  xvii.  18. 

quod    ille  judicaret  ?   &c.     S.August.  e  Deut.  xvii.  1 8.     f  2  Chron.  xxix.  4. 

cont.  Epist.  Parmen.  lib.  i.  c.  9. — Et  £  4  Reg.  xxiii.  2. 

quaestio  fuit,  an  pertineret  ad  impera-  h  Hie  maximus  pontifex  totius  eccle- 

torem  adversus  eos  aliquid  statuere  qui  siasticae  libertatis  unicus  assertor.     O- 

prava  in  religione  sectantur.  Ibid Nor  nuph.  in  Plat  in  Greg.  VII.  For  taking 

can  this  be  said  to  be  usurpation  in  the  occasion  by  the  war  which  Henry  the 

emperor.    Nam  S.  August,  alibi  sic,  Ad  Fourth  had  with  the  Saxons  and  their 

imperatoris  curam,  de  qua  rationem  Deo  neighbours,  and   the  complaint  of  the 

redditurus  est,  res  ilia  maxime  pertine-  Saxons  made  to   the   pope,  (of  which 

bat.     S.  August.  Epist.   162.  et  Epist.  Platina  in  the  life  of  Gregory  the  Se- 

50 — Quis  mente  sobrius  regibus  dicat,  venth,)  the  pope,  wise  enough  for  his 

Nolite   curare   in   regno  vestro   a  quo  own  advantages,  sought  not  only  to  free 

teneatur,  vel  oppugnetur  ecclesia  Do-  himself  from  the  emperor,  but  to  make 

mini  vestri  ?  &c.  Antiquitas  recte  dixit,  the  emperor  subject  to  him ;  and  for 

Magistratus    est    custos    legis,    scilicet  this  the  history  is  plain  enough. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  why  doth  he  not  tell  us,  that  the  pope  is  as  the  sun,  and 
the  emperor  as  the  moon  ?  Because  as  the  moon  borrows  all 
her  light  from  the  sun,  so  the  emperor  borrows  all  his  true 
light  from  the  pope ;  or  because  as  the  moon  still  increases 
in  light  so  long  as  she  follows  the  sun,  but  so  soon  as  ever 
she  steps  before  the  sun  she  wanes  presently,  and  her  light 
decreases  ;  so  the  emperor,  so  long  as  he  is  content  to  follow 
the  pope,  and  do  all  that  he  would  have  him,  his  light  and 
his  power  increase ;  but  if  he  do  but  offer  to  step  before 
(though  that  be  his  proper  place)  then  his  light  and  honour 
and  power  and  all  decrease.  And  this  pope  Gregory  the 
Seventh  made  too  good  upon  the  emperor  Henry  the  Fourth  ; 
and  pope  Adrian  the  Fourth,  and  Alexander  the  Third, 
and  Lucius  the  Third,  with  some  others,  upon  Frederick  Bar- 
barossa.  And  some  other  emperors  were  alike  served  where 
they  did  not  submit ;  and  I  hope  no  man  will  blame  the 
pope's  holiness  for  this :  for  if  the  emperors  kept  the  popes 
under  for  divers  years  together,  whereas  'Bellarmine  tells  us 
it  was  against  all  right  they  should  do  so,  the  pope  being 
never  rightfully  subject  unto  them,  I  hope  the  pope  having 
now  got  power  enough  may  keep  the  emperors  under,  and  not 
suffer  them  any  more  to  step  before  the  sun,  lest  like  moons 
as  they  are,  they  lose  all  their  light :  or  because  as  the  moon 
is  but  vicaria  soils,  the  vicar  or  substitute  of  the  sun,  as  kPhilo 
tells  us  ;  so  the  emperor,  at  least  in  all  spiritual  causes,  is  but 
the  pope's  substitute,  and  that  for  the  night,  that  his  holiness 
may  sleep  the  quieter  on  the  other  side  of  the  sphere  :  or 
lastly  (if  you  will  abuse  the  scripture,  as  you  too  often  do,  and 
as  Innocentius  did  in  the  decretal  very  grossly)  you  may  say, 
it  is  because  the  woman,  which  all  grant  represented  the 
church,  Jis  clothed  with  the  sun,  that  is,  with  the  glorious 
rays  of  the  pope,  and  had  the  moon,  that  is,  the  m  emperor, 

i  Papa,  utpote  regis  regum  vicarius,  lib.  v.  c.  7.  §.  Quod  si  Christian!.  Now 

nunquam  erat  de  jure  subditus  impera-  this  is  a  most  lewd  untruth,  as  appears 

toribus  terrenis,  sed  quia  turn  potestas  in  Tertulliari,  who  lived  about  the  year 

ejus   non  erat   nota: — et  quia  viribus  200  under  Severus.     And  the    Chris- 

temporalibus  destitutus  erat,  vellet,  nol-  tians  then  had  strength  enough  against 

let,  subjectus  esse  cogebatur.     Bellarm.  the  emperor,  had  they  had  right  enough 

in  Apologia,  c.  15.     Respons.  ad  Men-  with  it. 

dacium  10.     And  Bellarmine  is  at  the         k  L.  de  Monar.  1  Rev.  xii.  i. 

same  argument  for  deposing  of  kings         m  Sic  enim  Alexander  Tcrtius  collum 

too  :    Quia    deerant    vires    temporales  Frederici  Primi  pede  comprimebat.     Et 

Christianis.     Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont,  dixit,  Scriptum  est,  Super  aspidem   et 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  173 

under  her  feet ;  for  this  is  as  good,  as  literal,  as  proper  an  Sect.  26. 
interpretation  of  these  words  as  that  of  Innocentius  is  of  the 
words  Gen.  i.,  God  made  two  great  lights ;  the  greater  light  to 
rule  the  day,  and  the  less  to  rule  the  night".  Thus  he  or  you 
may  give  your  wits  leave  to  play  if  you  will,  for  the  pope's 
decretal  is  a  mere  fancy.  But  the  true  reason  indeed  why 
Innocentius  made  it  was  that  above  mentioned.  He  was 
now  in  that  greatness,  that  he  thought  he  might  pass  any 
thing  upon  the  Christian  world  that  pleased  him  ;  and  was 
therefore  resolved  to  bring  it  into  the  body  of  the  canon,  that 
aftertimes  might  have  a  law  to  legitimate  and  make  good 
their  predecessors1  usurpation  over  emperors  and  kings ;  and 
rather  than  fail  of  this,  he  would  not  spare  the  abusing  of 
scripture  itself:  where  by  the  way,  dares  A.  C.  say  this  pope 
did  not  err  in  cathedra,  when  he  was  so  dazzled  between  the 
sun  and  the  moon,  that  he  wanted  light  in  the  midst  of  it  to 
expound  scripture  I  Well,  I  would  have  the  Jesuits  leave 
their  practising,  and  remember,  first,  that  one  emperor  will 
not  always  be  able  to  establish  and  preserve  one  only  uniform 
practice  and  exercise  of  religion ;  secondly,  that  supposing 
he  both  can  and  will  so  do,  yet  the  Jesuits  cannot  be  certain 
that  that  one  uniform  exercise  of  religion  shall  be  the  Roman 
catholic  ;  and  thirdly,  that  as  there  is  a  body  of  earth,  a 
world  of  confusion  to  eclipse  their  moon  the  emperor,  so  in 
the  same  way,  and  by  like  interposition,  the  moon,  when  it  is 
grown  too  near  in  conjunction,  may  eclipse  their  sun  the  pope. 
And  there  is  no  great  doubt  but  he  will,  considering  what 
some  great  kings  make  of  the  pope's  power  at  this  day  when 
it  pleases  them. 

XII. — And  since  we  are  in  this  comparison  between  the 
sun  and  the  moon,  give  me  leave  a  little  further  to  examine 
who  A.  C.  and  his  fellow  Jesuits  with  some  others  would 
have  to  be  this  one  emperor.  I  am  not  willing  to  meddle 
with  any  the  secret  designs  of  foreign  states,  but  if  they  will 
express  their  designs  in  print,  or  publish  them  by  great  and 
full  authority,  I  hope  then  it  shall  be  neither  unlawful  nor 
unfit  for  me,  either  to  take  notice  or  to  make  use  of  them. 
Why  then  you  may  be  pleased  to  know,  they  would  have 

basiliscum.,  &c.     Jo.  Nauclems,  Chron.         n  Gen.  i.  16. 
Generatione  40.  circa  an.  1170. 

174  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  another  translation  of  the  empire  from  Germany  to  Spain ; 
they  think  belike  this  emperor's  line,  though  in  the  same 
house,  is  not  catholic  enough :  and  if  you  ask  me  how  I  know 
this  secret,  I  will  not  take  it  up  upon  any  common  report, 
though  I  well  know  what  that  says ;  but  I  will  tell  you  how 
I  know  it.  Somewhat  above  four  hundred  years  after  Inno- 
centius  made  his  comment  upon  the  two  great  lights,  the  sun 
and  the  moon,  the  pope  and  the  emperor,  °a  Spanish  friar 
follows  the  same  resemblance  between  the  monarchies  of 
Rome  and  Spain,  in  a  tract  of  his  intitled,  "  The  Agreement 
of  the  two  Catholic  Monarchies,"  and  printed  in  Spanish  in 
Madrid,  anno  1612.  In  the  frontispiece  or  titlepage  of  this 
book  there  are  set  out  two  scutcheons,  the  one  bearing  the 
cross  keys  of  Rome,  the  other  the  arms  of  Castile  and  Leon, 
both  joined  together  with  this  motto  ;  In  mnculo  pads,  in  the 
bond  of  peace.  On  the  one  side  of  this  there  is  a  portraiture 
resembling  Rome,  with  the  sun  shining  over  it,  and  darting 
his  beams  on  St.  Peter's  keys,  with  this  inscription  :  vLumi- 
nare  majus,  the  greater  light,  that  it  may  govern  the  city 
(that  is,  Rome)  and  the  whole  world ;  and  on  the  other  side 
there  is  another  image  designing  Spain,  with  the  moon  shin- 
ing over  that,  and  spreading  forth  its  rays  upon  the  Spanish 
scutcheon,  with  this  impress  :  q  Luminare  minus,  the  less  light, 
that  it  may  be  subject  to  the  city  (of  Rome  he  means)  and 
so  be  lord  to  govern  the  whole  world  besides ;  and  over  all 
this  in  the  top  of  the  titlepage,  there  is  printed  in  capital 
letters,  Fecit  Deus  duo  luminaria  magna,  God  made  two  great 
lights.  There  follows  after  in  this  author  a  discovery  at 
large  of  this  blazoning  of  these  arms,  but  this  is  the  sub- 
stance of  it,  and  abundantly  enough  to  shew  what  is  aimed 
at,  by  whom  and  for  whom.  And  this  book  was  not  stolen 
out  without  the  will  and  consent  of  the  state ;  for  it  hath 
printed  before  it  all  manner  of  license  that  a  book  can  well 
have :  for  it  hath  the  approbation  of  Father  Pedro  de  Buyza, 
of  the  company  of  the  Jesuits ;  of  John  de  Arcediano,  pro- 
vincial of  the  Dominicans;  of  Diego  Granero,  the  licenser 

o  John  de  Puente,  La  convenientia  reyes  del  mundo. 

de  las  dos  monarquias  catolicas  la  de  la         P  Luminare  majns,  ut  praesit  nrbi  et 

iglesia  Romana,  y  la  del  imperio  Espa-  orbi. 

niol,y  defensa  de  la  precedentia  de  los         q  Luminare  minus,  ut  subdatur  urbi, 

reyes  catolicos  de  Espania  a  todos  los  et  dominetur  orbi. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  1 75 

appointed  for  the  supreme  council  of  the  inquisition  ;  and  Sect.  26. 
some  of  these  Revised  this  book  by  r  order  from  the  lords  of 
that  council :  and  last  of  all  the  s  king's  privilege  is  to  it, 
with  high  commendation  of  the  work.  But  the  Spaniards 
had  need  look  to  it  for  all  this,  lest  the  French  deceive  them : 
for  now  lately  Friar  Campanella  hath  set  out  an  eclogue 
upon  the  birth  of  the  dolphin,  and  that  permissu  superiorum, 
by  license  from  his  superiors ;  in  which  he  says  expressly, 
"  lThat  all  princes  are  now  more  afraid  of  France  than  ever, 
for  that  there  is  provided  for  it  regnum  universale,  the  univer- 
sal kingdom  or  monarchy." 

XIII. — But  it  is  time  to  return  ;  for  A.  C.  in  this  passage  A.  C.  p.  60. 
hath  been  very  careful  to  tell  us  of  a  parliament,  and  of  living 
magistrates  and  judges  besides  the  law-books.  Thirdly,  there- 
fore the  church  of  England  (God  be  thanked)  thrives  happily 
under  a  gracious  prince,  and  well  understands  that  a  parlia- 
ment cannot  be  called  at  all  times  ;  and  that  there  are  visible 
judges  besides  the  law-books,  and  one  supreme  (long  may  he 
be,  and  be  happy)  to  settle  all  temporal  differences  (which 
certainly  he  might  much  better  perform  if  his  kingdoms  were 
well  rid  of  A.  C.  and  his  fellows.)  And  she  believes  too,  that 
our  Saviour  Christ  hath  left  in  his  church,  besides  his  law- 
book  the  scripture,  visible  magistrates  and  judges,  that  is, 
archbishops  and  bishops,  under  a  gracious  king,  to  govern 
both  for  truth  and  peace  according  to  the  scripture,  and  her 
own  canons  and  constitutions,  as  also  those  of  the  catholic 
church  which  cross  not  the  scripture  and  the  just  laws  of  the 
realm.  uBut  she  doth  not  believe  there  is  any  necessity  to 
have  one  pope  or  bishop  over  the  whole  Christian  world, 
more  than  to  have  one  emperor  over  the  whole  world  ;  which 
were  it  possible,  she  cannot  think  fit :  nor  are  any  of  these 

r  For  orden  de  los  seniores  del  con-  num  universale.     F.  Tho.  Campanellae 

seio  supremo.  Ecloga  in  Principis  Galliarum  Delphini 

s  For  mandado   del  rey  nuestro  se-  nativitatem,  cum  Annot.  Descrip.  Pari- 

nior.  siis,  1639.    Cum  permissu  superiorum. 

t  Qunm  Gallia  alat  20,000,000  homi-         u  Non  esse  necesse,  ut  sub   Christo 

num,    ex    singulis    centenis     sumendo  sit  urms  rector  totius  ecclesiae,  sed  suffi- 

unum  colliget  200,000  strenuorum  mili-  cit  quod   sint  plures  regentes  diversas 

tum    stipendiatorum,   commode,  perpe-  provincias,  sicut  sunt  plures  reges  gu- 

tuoque.  Propterea  omnes  terrse  principes  bernantes  plura  regna.     Ocham.  Dial, 

metuuut  nunc   magis  a    Gallia,  quam  lib.  2.  Tract,  i.  p.  i.  c.  30.  ad  i. 
unquam  ab  aliis ;  paratur  enim  illi  reg- 

176  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  26.  intermediate   judges,   or   that   one   which   you   would    have 

supreme,  infallible. 

A.  c.  p.  60.  XIV. — But  since  a  kingdom  and  a  parliament  please  A.  C. 
so  well  to  pattern  the  church  by,  I  will  follow  him  in  the 
way  he  goes,  and  be  bold  to  put  him  in  mind,  that  in  some 
kingdoms  there  are  divers  businesses  of  greatest  consequence, 
which  cannot  be  finally  and  bindingly  ordered  but  in  and  by 
parliament  ;  and  particularly  the  statute-laws,  which  must 
bind  all  the  subjects,  cannot  be  made  and  ratified  but  there. 
Therefore  according  to  A.  C.'s  own  argument,  there  will  be 
some  businesses  also  found,  (is  not  the  settling  of  the  divisions 
of  Christendom  one  of  them  ?)  which  can  never  be  well  settled 
but  in  a  v  general  council :  and  particularly  the  making  of 
canons,  which  must  bind  all  particular  Christians  and  churches, 
cannot  be  concluded  and  established  but  there.  And  again, 
as  the  supreme  magistrate  in  the  state  civil  may  not  abrogate 
the  laws  made  in  parliament,  though  he  may  dispense  with 
the  sanction  or  penalty  of  the  law  quoad  hie  et  nunc,  as  the 
lawyers  speak ;  so  in  the  ecclesiastical  body  no  bishop,  no 
not  the  pope,  (where  his  supremacy  is  admitted,)  hath  power 
to  x  disannul  or  violate  the  true  and  fundamental  decrees  of 
a  general  council,  though  he  may  perhaps  dispense  in  some 
cases  with  some  decrees.  By  all  which  it  appears,  though 
somewhat  may  be  done  by  the  bishops  and  governors  of  the 
church,  to  preserve  the  unity  and  certainty  of  faith,  and  to 
keep  the  church  from  renting,  or  for  uniting  itwhen_jtjs 
rent ;  yet  that  in  the  ordinary  way  which  tnVchurch  hath 
hitherto  kept,  some  things  there  are,  and  upon  great  emergent 
occasions  may  be,  which  can  have  no  other  help  than  a  lawful, 
free,  and  well  composed  general  council :  and  when  that  cannot 
be  had,  the  church  must  pray  that  it  may,  and  expect  till  it 
may ;  or  else  reform  itself  per  partes^  by  national  or  provin- 

v  Propter  defectum  conciliorum  gene-  mata,  who  says  every  thing  that  may 

raliura  totius  ecclesiae,  quae  sola  audet  be  said  for  the  pope's  supremacy,  yet 

intrepide  corrigere  omnes,  ea  mala  quae  dares  not  say,  Papam  posse  revocare  et 

universalem  tangunt  ecclesiam,  manen-  tollere  omnia  statuta  generalium  con- 

tia  din  incorrecta  cresctmt,  &c.  Ger-  ciliorum,  sed  aliqua  tantum.  Jo.  de 

son.  Declarat.  Defectuum  Virorum  Turrecr.  Summae  de  Ecclesia,  lib.  iii. 

Ecclesiasticorum,  torn.  i.  p.  209.  c.  55.  Et  postea  :  Papa  non  potest  re- 

x  Sunt  enim  indissolubilia  decreta,  vocare  decreta  primorum  qiiatuor  con- 

quibus  reverentia  debita  est.  Prosper,  ciliorum,  quia  non  sunt  nisi  declarativa 

cont.  Collatorem,  c.  i.  And  Turrecre-  articulomm  fidei.  Ibid.  c.  57.  ad  2. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  177 

cial  synods,  (as  hath  been  said  y  before.)  And  in  the  mean  Sect.  2 6, 2 7. 
time  it  little  beseems  A.  C.  or  any  Christian,  to  check  at  the 
wisdom  of  z  Christ,  if  he  have  not  taken  the  way  they  think 
fitting  to  settle  church  differences ;  or  if,  for  the  church's 
sin,  or  trial,  the  way  of  composing  them  be  left  more  un- 
certain than  they  would  have  it,  that  they  which  are  approved 
may  be  known,  1  Cor.  xi.  19.  But  the  Jesuit  had  told  me  be- 


fore,  that  a  general  council  had  adjudged  these  things  already. 
For  so  he  says. 

J?,  I  told  him,  that  a  general  council,  to  wit,  of  Trent,  had 
already  judged,  not  the  Roman  church,  but  the  prc- 
testants,  to  hold  errors.  That  (saith  the  33.)  was  not  a 
lawful  council. 

23,  I. — It  is  true,  that  you  replied  for  the  council  of  Trent,  gect.  27. 
And  my  answer  was,  not  only,  That  the  council  was  not  legal 
in  the  necessary  conditions  to  be  observed  in  a  general  coun- 
cil, but  also,  That  it  was  no  general  council :  which,  again, 
you  are  content  to  omit.  Consider  it  well:  first,  Is  that 
council  legal,  the  abettors  whereof  maintain  publicly  that  it 
is  lawful  for  them  to  conclude  any  controversy,  and  make  it  be 
defide,  and  so  in  your  judgment  fundamental,  though  it  have 
not,  I  do  not  say  now  the  written  word  of  God  for  warrant, 
either  in  express  letter  or  necessary  sense  and  deduction,  (as 
all  unerring  councils  have  had,  and  as  all  must  have  that  will 
not  err,)  but  not  so  much  as  a probable  testimony  from  it ; 
nay,  quite  extra,  without  the  scripture?  Nay,  secondly,  Is 
that  council  b  legal,  where  the  pope,  the  chief  person  to  be  re- 

y  Sect.  24.  num.  I.  a  se  creatam  sine  regimine  unius  per- 
z  And  shall  we  think  that  Christ,  the  sonae  reliquisset.  Extravagant.  Com. 
wisest  King,  hath  not  provided  &c.  Tit.  de  Majoritate  et  Obedientia  c. 
A.  C.  p.  60.  Where  I  cannot  but  com-  Unam  sanctam.  In  addition.  D.  P. 
mend  either  A.  C.'s  modesty,  that  he  Bertrandi  edit.  Paris.  1585. 
doth  not,  or  his  cunning,  that  he  will  a  Etiamsi  non  confirmetur,  ne  proba- 
not,  go  so  far  as  some  have  done  be-  bilitestimonioscripturarum.  Stapl.  Re- 
fore  him;  though  in  these  words,  lect.  Cont.  4.  q.  I.  Art.  3. 
"  Shall  we  think"  &c.  he  goes  too  far.  b  Here  A.  C.  tells  us,  "  That  doubt- 
Non  videretur  Dominus  discretus  fuisse  less  the  Arians  also  did  mislike,  that 
(ut  cum  reverentia  ejus  loquar)  nisi  at  Nice  the  pope  had  legates  to  carry 
unicum  post  se  talem  vicarium  reli-  his  messages,  and  that  one  of  them,  in 
quisset,  qui  haec  omnia  potest.  Fuit  his  place,  sat  as  president."  Why  but, 
autem  ejus  vicarius  Petrus.  Et  idem  first,  it  is  manifest  that  Hosius  was 
dicendum  est  de  successoribus  Petri,  president  at  the  council  of  Nice,  and 
cum  eadem  absurditas  sequeretur,  si  not  the  bishop  of  Rome,  either  by  him- 
post  mortem  Petri,  humanam  naturam  self  or  his  legates.  And  so  much  Atha- 



Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  27.  formed,  shall  sit  president  in  it,  and  be  chief  judge  in  his 
own  cause,  against  all  law,  divine,  natural,  and  human,  in  a 
place  not  free,  but  in  or  too  near  his  own  dominion? — to 
which  all  were  not  called  that  had  deliberative  or  consultative 
voice  \ — in  which  none  had  suffrage  but  such  as  were  sworn  to 
the  pope  and  the  church  of  Rome,  and  professed  enemies  to 
all  that  called  for  reformation  or  a  free  council?  And  the 
pope  c  himself,  to  shew  his  charity,  had  declared  and  pro- 
nounced the  appellants  heretics,  before  they  were  condemned 
by  the  council.  I  hope  an  assembly  of  enemies  are  no  lawful 
council :  and  I  think  the  decrees  of  such  an  one  are  omni  jure 
nulla,  and  carry  their  nullity  with  them  through  all  law. 
II. — Again  ;  Is  that  council  general  that  hath  none  of  the 

nasius  himself  (who  was  present,  and 
surely  understood  the  council  of  Nice, 
and  who  presided  there,  as  well  as  A.C.) 
tells  us :  Hosius  hie  est  princeps  syno- 
dorum.  (So  belike  he  presided  in  other 
councils  as  well  as  at  Nice.)  Hie  for- 
mulam  fidei  in  Nicaena  synodo  conce- 
pit.  And  this  the  Arians  themselves  con- 
fess to  Constantius  the  emperor,  then 
seduced  to  be  theirs  ;  apud  S.  Atha- 
nas.  Epist.  ad  solitar.  vitam  agentes. 
But  then  secondly,  I  do  not  except 
against  the  pope's  sitting  as  president, 
either  at  Nice  or  Trent ;  for  that  he 
might  do,  when  called  or  chosen  to  it, 
as  well  as  any  other  patriarch,  if  you 
consider  no  more  but  his  sitting  as  pre- 
sident. But  at  Nice  the  cause  was  not 
his  own,  but  Christ's,  against  the  Ari- 
ans ;  whereas  at  Trent,  it  was  merely 
his  own,  his  own  supremacy,  and  his 
church's  corruptions,  against  the  pro- 
testants :  and  therefore  surely  not  to 
sit  president  at  the  trial  of  his  own 
cause,  though  in  other  causes  he  might 
sit  as  well  as  other  patriarchs.  And 
for  that  of  Bellarmine,  de  Concil.  lib.  i. 
c.  21.  §.  Tertia  conditio,  namely, 
"  That  it  is  unjust  to  deny  the  Roman 
prelate  his  right  (jus  suum)  in  calling 
general  councils,  and  presiding  in  them., 
in  possession  of  which  right  he  hath 
been  for  1500  years;"  that  is  but  a 
bold  assertion  of  the  cardinal's,  by  his 
leave ;  for  he  gives  us  no  proof  of  it 
but  his  bare  word ;  whereas  the  very 
authentic  copies  of  the  councils,  pub- 
lished and  printed  by  the  Romanists 
themselves,  affirm  clearly  they  were 
called  by  emperors,  not  by  the  pope; 

and  that  the  pope  did  not  preside  in  all 
of  them.  And  I  hope  Bellarmine  will 
not  expect  we  should  take  his  bare 
word  against  the  council's.  Arid  most 
certain  it  is,  that  even  as  Hosius  pre- 
sided in  the  council  at  Nice,  and  no 
way  that  as  the  pope's  legate,  so  also 
in  the  second  general  council,  which 
was  the  first  of  Constantinople,  Necta- 
rius  bishop  of  Constantinople  presided. 
Concil.  Chalced.  Act.  vi.  p.  136.  apud 
Binium.  In  the  third,  which  was  the 
first  at  Ephesus,  St.  Cyril  of  Alexan- 
dria presided.  And  though  pope  Cce- 
lestine  was  joined  with  him,  yet  he 
sent  none  out  of  the  west  to  that  coun- 
cil, till  many  things  were  therein  fi- 
nished, as  appears  apud  Act.  Concil. 
torn.  ii.  c.  16,  17.  In  the  fourth,  at 
Chalcedon,  the  legates  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome  had  the  prime  place.  In  the 
fifth,  Eutychius  bishop  of  Constanti- 
nople was  president.  In  the  sixth  and 
seventh,  the  legates  of  the  pope  were 
president ;  yet  so  as  that  almost  all 
the  duty  of  a  moderator  or  president 
was  performed  in  the  seventh  by  Tha- 
rasius,  bishop  of  Constantinople ;  as  ap- 
pears manifestly  in  the  Acts  of  that 
council.  And  since  these  seven  are  all 
the  general  councils  which  the  Greeks 
and  Latins  jointly  acknowledge,  and 
that  in  these  other  patriarchs  and  bi- 
shops presided  as  oft,  at  least,  as  the  bi- 
shops of  Rome,  what  is  become  of 
Bellarmine's  brag,  that  the  pope  hath 
been  possessed  of  this  right  of  presiding 
in  general  councils  for  the  space  of 
1500  years  ? 
c  Leo  X.  Bull.  Jun.  8.  1520. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  179 

eastern  churches'  consent  nor  presence  there  ?  Are  all  the  Sect.  27. 
Greeks  so  become  non  ecclesia,  no  church,  that  they  have  no 
interest  in  general  councils?  It  numbers  indeed  among  the 
subscribers,  six  Greeks  :  they  might  be  so  by  nation,  or  by 
title  purposely  given  them ;  but  dare  you  say  they  were 
actually  bishops  of  and  sent  from  the  Greek  church  to  the 
council  ?  Or  is  it  to  be  accounted  a  general  council,  that  in 
many  sessions  had  scarce  ten  archbishops,  or  forty  or  fifty 
bishops  present  ?  And  for  the  west  of  Christendom,  nearer 
home,  it  reckons  one  English,  St.  Asaph.  But  cardinal  Pole 
was  there  too  :  and  English  indeed  he  was  by  birth,  but  not 
sent  to  that  council  by  the  king  and  church  of  England,  but  as 
one  of  the  pope's  legates ;  and  so  we  find  him  at  the  five  first 
sessions  of  that  council :  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  council 
he  was  not  bishop  in  the  church  of  England ;  and  after  he 
was  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  he  never  went  over  to  the  coun- 
cil. And  can  you  prove  that  St.  Asaph  went  thither  by  au- 
thority ?  There  were  but  few  of  other  nations ;  and  it  may  be 
some  of  them  reckoned  with  no  more  truth  than  the  Greeks. 
In  all  the  sessions  under  Paul  the  Third,  but  two  Frenchmen, 
and  sometimes  none ;  as  in  the  six  under  Julius  the  Third, 
when  Henry  the  Second  of  France  protested  against  that 
council.  And  in  the  end,  it  is  well  known  how  all  the  French 
(which  were  then  a  good  part)  held  off,  till  the  cardinal  of 
Lorrain  was  got  to  Rome.  As  for  the  Spaniards,  they  la- 
boured for  many  things,  upon  good  grounds,  and  were  most 
unworthily  overborne. 

III. — To  all  this  A.  C.  hath  nothing  to  say,  but  "  That  it  is  A.  c.  p.  6r. 
not  necessary  to  the  lawfulness  and  generalness  of  a  council, 
that  all  bishops  of  the  world  should  be  actually  present,  sub- 
scribe, or  consent ;  but  that  such  promulgation  be  made,  as  is 
morally  sufficient  to  give  notice  that  such  a  council  is  called,  and 
that  all  may  come  if  they  will ;  and  that  a  major  part,  at 
least,  of  those  that  are  present  give  assent  to  the  decrees."" 
I  will  forget,  that  it  was  but  pag.  59.  in  which  A.  C.  speaks  A.  C.  p.  59. 
of  all  pastors ;  and  those  not  only  summoned,  but  gathered 
together.  And  I  will  easily  grant  him,  that  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  all  bishops  in  the  Christian  world  be  present  and 
subscribe :  but  sure  it  is  necessary  to  the  generalness  of  a 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  2  7, 28.  council  that  some  be  e  there,  and  authorized,  for  all  particu- 
lar churches ;  and  to  the  freedom  of  a  council,  that  all  that 
come  may  come  safe ;  and  to  the  lawfulness  of  a  council, 
that  all  may  come  unengaged,  and  not  fastened  to  a  side,  be- 
fore they  sit  down  to  argue  or  deliberate.  Nor  is  such  a 
promulgation  as  A.  C-  mentions  sufficient,  but  only  in  case  of 
contumacy ;  and  that  where  they  which  are  called  and  refuse 
to  come  have  no  just  cause  for  their  not  coming,  as  too  many 
had  in  the  case  of  Trent.  And  were  such  a  promulgation 
sufficient  for  the  generalness  of  a  council,  yet  for  the  freedom 
and  the  lawfulness  of  it  it  were  not. 

$.   So  (said  I)  would  Arians  say  of  the  council  of  Nice. 
The  bishop  would  not  admit  the  case  to  be  like  : — 

Sect.  28.  33*  So  indeed  you  said.  And  not  you  alone :  it  is  the 
common  objection  made  against  all  that  admit  not  every 
latter  council  as  fully  as  that  council  of  Nice,  famous  through 
all  the  Christian  world.  In  the  mean  time,  nor  you  nor  they 
consider,  that  the  case  is  not  alike,  as  I  then  told  you.  If 
the  case  be  alike  in  all,  why  do  not  you  admit  that  which  was 
held  at  Ariminum,  and  the  second  of  Ephesus,  as  well  as 
Nice  ?  If  you  say  (as  yours  do)  it  was  because  the  pope  ap- 
proved them  not,  that  is  a  true  cause,  but  not  adequate  or 
full :  for  it  was  because  the  whole  church  refused  themf ;  with 
whom  the  Roman  prelate  (standing  then  entire  in  the  faith) 
agreed,  and  so  (for  his  patriarchate)  refused  those  councils. 
But  suppose  it  true  that  these  synods  were  not  admitted,  be- 
cause the  pope  refused  them,  yet  this  ground  is  gained,  that 
the  case  is  not  alike  for  men^s  assent  to  all  councils.  And  if 
you  look  to  have  this  granted,  that  the  pope  must  confirm,  or 
the  council  is  not  lawful,  we  have  far  more  reason  to  look 
that  this  be  not  denied,  That  the  scripture  must  not  be  de- 
parted from,  in  s  letter,  or  necessary  sense,  or  the  council  is 

e  Ut  aliqui  mittantur,  et  adveniant,  the  letter  and  sense  of  scripture.    They 

et  conveniant,  &c.  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  said  so  indeed :  but  the  testimony  of 

lib.  i.  c.  17.  §.  Quarta,  ut  saltern.  the  whole  church,  both  then  and  since, 

f  Sect.  26.  num.  I.  went  with  the  council  against  the  Ari- 

g  Here  A.  C.  tells  us,  That  the  Ari-  ans.      So   is    it   not  here   against   the 

ans  thought  so  of  the  council  of  Nice,  protestants  for  Trent ;    for  they  offer 

p.  61,  namely,  that  they  departed  from  to  be  tried  by  that  very  council  of  Nice, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  181 

not  lawful.  For  the  consent  and  confirmation  of  scripture  is  Sect.  28,29. 
of  far  greater  authority  to  make  the  council  authentical,  and 
the  decisions  of  it  de  fide,  than  any  confirmation  of  the  pope 
can  be.  Now  of  these  two,  the  council  of  Nice,  we  are  sure, 
had  the  first,  the  rule  of  scripture ;  and  you  say  it  had  the 
second,  the  pope's  confirmation.  The  council  of  Trent,  we 
are  able  to  prove,  had  not  the  first ;  and  so  we  have  no  rea- 
son to  respect  the  second.  And  to  what  end  do  your  learned 
men  maintain,  that  a  council  may  make  a  conclusion  de  fide, 
though  it  be  simply  h  extra,  out  of  all  bound  of  scripture ; 
but  out  of  a  jealousy  at  least,  that  this  of  Trent,  and  some 
others,  have  in  their  determinations  left  both  letter  and 
sense  of  scripture  ?  Shew  this  against  the  council  of  Nice,  and 
I  will  grant  so  much  of  the  case  to  be  like.  But  what  will 
you  say  if  iConstantine  required,  "  that  things  thus  brought 
into  question  should  be  answered  and  solved  by  testimony 
out  of  scripture  f  and  the  bishops  of  the  Nicene  council 
never  refused  that  rule.  And  what  will  you  say  if  they  pro- 
fess they  depart  not  from  it,  "  kbut  are  ready  by  many  testi- 
monies of  divine  scripture  to  demonstrate  their  faith  f  Is  the 
case  then  alike  betwixt  it  and  Trent  ?  Surely  no.  But  you 
say  that  I  pretended  something  else,  for  my  not  admitting 
the  case  to  be  alike. 

Jp     Pretending  that  the  pope  made  bishops  of  purpose  for 
his  side.     But  this  the  bishop  proved  not. 

23*  I. — No :  nor  had  I  reason  to  take  on  me  to  prove  what  Sect.  29. 
I  said  not.  I  know  it  will  be  expected  I  should  prove  what  I 
say.  And  it  is  hard  to  prove  the  purpose  of  the  pope's  heart. 
For  if  it  be  proved  that  he  made  bishops  at  that  time ;  that 
some  of  them  were  titular  only,  and  had  no  livelihood  to  sub- 
sist but  out  of  his  purse,  (and  so  must  hang  their  judgment 
at  the  strings  of  it ;)  that  some  of  these  thus  made  were  sent 
to  the  council  and  sure  not  without  their  errand ;  yet  if  the 

and  all  the  ancient  councils  and  Fathers         i  Literarum   divinitus   inspiratarum 

of  the  church,  within  the  first  four  hun-  testimoniis,  in  Syn.  Nic.  lib.  ii.  torn.  i. 

dred  years,  and  somewhat  further.  per  Nicolinum. 

h  So  Stapleton  often ;  but  the  Fathers  k  Ibid,  in  Osii  sententia,  p.  5 1 7.  Pa- 
quite  otherwise.  Quae  extra  evange-  rati  ex  S.  Spiritus  arbitrio  per  plurima 
lium  sint,  non  defendam.  Hilar.  ad  divinarum  scripturarum  testimonia  de- 
Const,  lib.  ii.  monstrare  haec  ita  se  habere. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  29.  pope  will  say  he  neither  made  nor  sent  them  to  overrule  the 
Holy  Ghost  at  that  meeting,  or  of  purpose  for  his  side,  (as  no 
question  but  it  will  be  said,)  who  can  prove  it  that  is  not  a 
surveyor  of  the  heart  ?  But  though  the  pope's  heart  cannot 
be  seen,  yet  if  these  and  the  like  presumptions  be  true,  it  is 
a  great  sign  that  Trent  was  too  corrupt  and  factious  a  meet- 
ing for  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  at ;  — and  sure  the  case  in  this 
not  alike  at  Nice. 

II. — That  which  I  said  was,  That  Trent  could  be  no  indif- 
ferent council  to  the  church,  the  pope  having  made  himself  a 
strong  party  in  it.  And  this  I  proved,  though  you  be  here 
not  only  content  to  omit,  but  plainly  to  deny  the  proof.  For 
I  proved  it  thus,  (and  you  Answered  not,)  That  there  were 
more  Italian  bishops  there,  than  of  all  Christendom  besides. 
More  !  yea  more  than  double.  And  this  I  proved  out  of  the 
council  itself,  which  you  had  in  your  hand  in  decimo  sexto; 
but  had  no  great  heart  to  look  it.  For  where  the  number  of 
prelates  is  expressed  that  had  suffrage  and  vote  in  that  coun- 
cil, the  Italians  are  set  down  to  be  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
seven,  and  all  the  rest  make  but  eighty-three.  So  that  there 
were  more  Italian  bishops  by  one  hundred  and  four,  than  of 
all  the  rest  of  Christendom.  Sure  the  pope  did  not  mean  to 
be  overreached  in  this  council.  And  whatsoever  became  of 
his  infallibility  otherwise,  he  might  this  way  be  sure  to  be  in- 
fallible in  whatsoever  he  would  have  determined :  and  this, 

1  Here  A.  C.  is   angry,   and   says,  Germany  were  almost  as  near  as  the 

"  This  was  no  proof,  nor  worthy  of  any  Italians  themselves.      And    why   then 

answer,  or  looking  into  the  book  for  it.  came  no  more  of  these  that  were  near 

First,   because  it  is  only  a  surmise  of  enough?    Well;    A.  C.  may  say  what 

adversaries,  who  are  apt  to  interpret  to  he  will.    But  the  pope  remembered  well 

the    worst.      Secondly,    because    there  the   councils  of  Constance   and    Basil, 

might  be  more  Italian  bishops  there,  as  and  thought  it  wisdom  to  make  sure 

being  nearer,  yet  without  any  factious  work   at    Trent.      For  in  later   times 

combination  with  the  pope :  as  in  the  (for  their  own  fears,  no  doubt)  the  bi- 

Greek  councils  more  Grecians  were  pre-  shops   of    Rome  have   been    no   great 

sent."     A.   C.  p.  62.     No  proof,  or  a  friends   to  general   councils,   especially 

weak  one.    Let  the  reader  judge  that,  free  ones  :  Multi  suspicantur,  quod  haec 

But  why  no  proof?    Because  a  surmise  dissimulaverit    Romana  cxiria,  et   con- 

of  adversaries.     Is  that   a   surmise   of  cilia  fieri  neglexerit,  ut  possit  ad  suae 

adversaries  that  is  taken  out  of  the  coun-  voluntatis  libitum  plenius  dominari,  et 

cil  itself  ?    Is  that  council  then  become  jura  aliarum  ecclesiarurn  liberius  usur- 

regnum   division,  and  apt  to  interpret  pare.     Quod  non  assero  esse  verum,  sed 

the  worst   of  itself?     Yea,  but  there  quia  hujusmodi  laborat  infamia,  ideo,&c. 

were   more    Italian    bishops,    as  being  Pet.  de  Aliaco,  Card.  Cameracensis  lib. 

nearer.     Most   true  ;     nearer  a   great  de  Reformat.  Eccles.  in  Fascic.  rerum 

deal  than  the  Grecian  bishops :  but  the  expetend.  fol.  204.  A. 
bishops  of  France  and  of  some  parts  of 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  183 

without  all  doubt,  is  all  the  infallibility  he  hath.  So  I  proved  Sect.  29. 
this  sufficiently,  I  think.  For  if  it  were  not  to  be  sure  of  a 
side,  give  any  satisfying  reason  why  such  a  potent  party  of 
Italians,  more  than  double  to  the  whole  Christian  world, 
should  be  there.  Shew  me  the  like  for  Nice,  and  I  will  give 
it  that  the  case  is  alike  between  these  two  councils. 

III. — Here  Bellarmine  comes  in  to  help :  but  sure  it  will 
not  help  you,  that  he  hath  offered  at  as  much  against  the 
council  of  Nice  as  I  have  urged  against  that  at  Trent.  For 
he  tells  us,  "  m  That  in  the  council  at  Nice,  there  were  as  few 
bishops  of  the  west  present  as  were  of  the  east  at  Trent," 
but  five  in  all.  Be  it  so:  yet  this  will  not  make  the  case 
alike  between  the  two  councils.  First,  because  I  press  not 
the  disparity  in  number  only ;  but  with  it  the  pope's  carriage, 
to  be  sure  of  a  major  part.  For  it  lay  upon  the  pope  to  make 
sure  work  at  Trent,  both  for  himself  and  his  church.  But 
neither  the  Greek  church  in  general,  nor  any  patriarch  of 
the  east,  had  any  private  interest  to  look  to  in  the  council  at 
Nice.  Secondly,  because  I  press  not  so  much  against  the 
council  of  Trent,  That  there  were  so  exceeding  many  bishops 
of  the  west,  compared  with  those  of  the  east,  (for  that  must 
needs  be,  when  a  council  is  held  in  the  west,)  but  that  there 
were  so  many  more  Italians  and  bishops  obnoxious  to  the 
pope's  power,  than  of  all  Germany,  France,  Spain,  and  all 
other  parts  of  the  west  besides.  Thirdly,  because  both  Bel- 
larmine and  A.  C.  seek  to  avoid  the  dint  of  this  argument 
by  comparing  the  western  with  the  eastern  bishops,  and  are 
content  to  say  nothing  about  the  excessive  number  of  Italians 
to  others  of  the  west,  that  will  receive  a  fuller  answer  than 
any  of  the  rest.  For  though  very  few  western  bishops  were 
at  the  council  of  Nice,  being  so  remote ;  yet  at  the  same 
time  pope  Sylvester  held  a  council  at  Rome,  in  which  he  with 
two  hundred  and  seventy-five  bishops  of  the  west  confirmed 
the  Nicene  Creed,  nand  anathematized  "  all  those  which 
should  dare  to  dissolve  the  definition  of  that  holy  and  great 

m  In  concilio  Nicaeno  primo  ex  occi-         n  Onmes  qui  ausi  fuerint  dissolvere 

dente    solum    fuerunt    duo    presbyter!  definitionem    sancti   et   magni   concilii 

missi  ex  Italia,  unus  episcopus  ex  Gal  -  quod   apud  Nicaeam  congregatum  est, 

lia,  unus  ex  Hispania,  et  unus  ex  Afri-  anatbematizamus.    Concil.  Rom.  3.  sub 

ca.   Bellarm.   de  Concil.  lib.  i.   c.  1 7.  Sylvestro.   Apud  Binium,  p.  449. 
§.  antepenult. 


184  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  29.  council."  Now  let  Bellarmine,  or  A.  C.,  or  any  else,  shew, 
that  when  the  council  of  Trent  sat,  there  was  another  coun- 
cil (though  never  so  privately  in  regard  of  their  miserable  op- 
pression) which  sat  in  Greece,  or  any  where  in  the  east,  under 
any  patriarch  or  Christian  bishop,  which  did  confirm  the  ca- 
nons of  the  council  of  Trent,  and  anathematize  them  which 
admitted  them  not ;  and  I  will  confess,  they  speak  home  to 
the  comparison  between  the  councils,  else  a  blind  man  may 
see  the  difference  ;  and  it  is  a  vast  one. 

A.  C.  p.  62.  IV. — But  here  A.  C.  makes  account  he  hath  found  a  better 
reply  to  this,  and  now  tells  us,  "  that  neither  French,  nor 
Spanish,  nor  schismatical  Greeks  did  agree  with  the  pro- 
testants  in  those  points  which  were  defined  in  that  council ; 
especially  after  it  was  confirmed  by  the  pope  ;  as  appears  by 
the  censure  of  Jeremias  the  Greek  patriarch.1'  Who  agreed 
with  the  protestants  in  the  points  defined  by  that  council,  (as 
he  speaks,)  or  rather  (to  speak  properly)  against  the  points 
there  defined,  I  know  not.  And,  for  aught  A.  C.  knows, 
many  might  agree  with  them  in  heart,  that  in  such  a  council 
durst  not  open  themselves.  And  what  knows  A.  C.  how 
many  might  have  been  of  their  opinion,  in  the  main,  before 
the  council  ended,  had  they  been  admitted  to  a  fair  and  a 
free  dispute  ?  And  it  may  be  too,  some  decrees  would  have 
been  more  favourable  to  them,  had  not  the  care  of  the  pope's 
interest  made  them  sourer;  for  else  what  mean  these  words, 
"  especially  after  it  was  confirmed  by  the  pope  T  As  for  Je- 
remias, it  is  true,  his  censure  is,  in  many  things,  against  the 
protestants ;  but  I  find  not  that  that  censure  of  his  is  war- 
ranted by  any  authority  of  the  Greek  church,  or  that  he  gave 
the  protestants  any  hearing  before  he  passed  his  censure. 
And  at  the  most,  it  is  but  the  censure  of  a  schismatic,  in 
A.  C.'s  own  judgment.  And  for  his  flourish  which  follows, 
"  That  east  and  west  would  condemn  protestants  for  here- 
tics," I  would  he  would  forbear  prophesying,  till  both  parts 
might  meet  in  a  free  general  council  that  sought  Christ  more 
than  themselves.  But  I  find  the  Jesuit  hath  not  done  with 
me  yet,  but  adds : 

,dF.    In  fine,  the  33.  wished,  that  a  lawful  general  council 
were  called  to  end  controversies.     The  persons  present 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  185 

said,  that  the  king  was  inclined  thereunto,  and  that  there-  Sect.  30,31. 

fore  we  catholics  might  do  well  to  concur. 

33.  And  what  say  you  to  my  wish  ?  You  pretend  great  love  Sect.  30. 
to  the  truth  ;  would  you  not  have  it  found  ?  Can  you  or  any 
Christian  be  offended  that  there  should  be  a  good  end  of  con- 
troversies ?  Can  you  think  of  a  better  end  than  by  a  general 
council  ?  And  if  you  have  a  most  gracious  king  inclined  unto 
it,  (as  you  say  it  was  offered,)  how  can  you  acquit  yourselves 
if  you  do  not  consent  ?  Now  here  A.  C.  "  marvels  what  kind  A.  C.  p.  62. 
of  general  council  I  would  have,  and  what  rules  I  would  have 
observed  in  it,  which  are  morally  like  to  be  observed,  and 
make  an  end  of  controversies,  better  than  their  catholic  ge- 
neral councils."  Truly  I  am  not  willing  to  leave  A.  C.  un- 
satisfied in  any  thing  ;  nor  have  I  any  meaning  to  trouble  the 
church  with  any  new  devisings  of  mine.  Any  general  council 
shall  satisfy  me,  (and,  I  presume,  all  good  Christians,)  that  is 
lawfully  called,  continued,  and  ended,  according  to  the  same 
course  and  under  the  same  °  conditions  which  general  coun- 
cils observed  in  the  primitive  church ;  which  I  am  sure  were 
councils  general,  and  catholic,  whatever  yours  be.  But  I 
doubt  that,  after  all  the  noise  made  about  these  requisite  con- 
ditions, A.  C.  and  his  fellows  will  be  found  as  much,  if  not 
more  defective  in  performance  of  the  conditions,  than  in  the 
conditions  themselves.  Well ;  the  Jesuit  goes  on,  for  all 

S>  I  asked  the  33.  whether  he  thought  a  general  council 
might  err :    he  said  it  might. 

33.  I  presume  you  do  not  expect  I  should  enter  into  the  Sect.  31. 
proof  of  this  controversy,  "  Whether  a  general  council  may 
err  in  determination  or  not."  Yourself  brought  no  proof 
that  it  cannot ;  and  till  that  be  brought,  my  speech  is  good 
that  it  can :  and  yet  I  hope  to  be  found  no  infringer  of  any 
power  given  by  Christ  to  his  church.  But  it  seems  by  that 
which  follows,  you  did  by  this  question,  "  Can  a  general 
council  err  T  but  seek  to  win  ground  for  your  other  which 

o  Ex  iis  conciliis  quse  omnium  con-  clesiae  colligimus  quatuor  conditiones 
sensu  generalia  fuerunt,  qualia  sunt  requiri,  et  sufficere.  Bellarm.  de  Concil. 
quatuor  prima  :  et  ex  consuetudine  ec-  lib.  i.  c.  1 7.  §.  2. 


186  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  32.  $.  If  a  general  council  may  err,  what  nearer  are  we  then, 
said  I,  to  unity,  after  a  council  hath  determined  ?  "  Yes," 
said  he,  "  although  it  may  err,  yet  we  should  be  bound 
to  hold  with  it  till  another  come  to  reverse  it." 

Sect.  32.  35.  I. — Whether  a  general  council  may  err  or  not,  is  a 
question  of  great  consequence  in  the  church  of  Christ.  To 
say  it  cannot  err,  leaves  the  church  not  only  without  remedy 
against  an  error  once  determined,  but  also  without  sense  that 
it  may  need  a  remedy,  and  so  without  care  to  seek  it,  which 
is  the  misery  of  the  church  of  Rome  at  this  day.  To  say  it 
can  err,  seems  to  expose  the  members  of  the  church  to  an 
uncertainty  and  wavering  in  the  faith;  to  make  unquiet 
spirits  not  only  to  disrespect  former  councils  of  the  church, 
but  also  to  slight  and  contemn  whatsoever  it  may  now  deter- 
mine, into  which  error  some  opposers  of  the  church  of  Rome 
have  fallen.  And  upon  this  is  grounded  your  question, 
"  Wherein  are  we  nearer  to  unity,  if  a  council  may  err  T 
But  in  relating  my  answer  to  this  you  are  not  so  candid,  for 
my  words  did  not  sound  as  yours  seem  to  do,  "  That  we 
should  hold  with  the  council,  err  or  not  err,  till  another  came 
to  reverse  it ;"  as  if  grounds  of  faith  might  vary  at  the 
racket,  and  be  cast  of  each  side  as  a  cunning  hand  might 
lay  them. 

II. — You  forget  again,  omit  at  least,  (and  with  what  mind 
you  best  know,)  the  caution  which  I  added.  For  I  said  the 
determination  of  a  general  council  erring  was  to  stand  in  force, 
and  to  have  external  obedience  at  the  least  yielded  to  it,  till 
P  evidence  of  scripture,  or  a  demonstration  to  the  contrary, 
made  the  error  appear,  and  until  thereupon  q  another  council 
of  equal  authority  did  reverse  it.  And  indeed  I  might  have 

P  Sect.  33.  Consid.  5.  num.  I.  II.  so  in  infinitum :  so  our  faith  should 
And  the  reason  of  this  is,  because  to  never  have  where  to  settle  and  rest  it- 
have  a  general  council  deceived  is  not  self.  Maldon.  in  St.  Matth.  xviii.  20. 
impossible ;  but  altogether  impossible  it  But  to  this  I  answer,  that  the  ancient 
is  that  demonstrative  reason,  or  testi-  church  took  this  way,  as  will  afterward 
mony  divine,  should  deceive.  Hooker,  appear  in  St.  Augustine.  Next,  there 
Eccles.  Pol.  b.  ii.  §.7.  is  no  uncertainty  at  all ;  for  no  general 

q  In  which  case  Maldonat  puts  in  council,  lawfully  called  and  so  proceed- 

the  shrewdest  argument ;  namely,  that  ing,  can  be  questioned  in  another,  un- 

this  way  we  should  never  have  a  cer-  less  it  so  fall  out  that  evident  scripture 

tain  end  of  controversies.  For  to  try  or  a  demonstration  appear  against  it. 

whether  any  thing  were  decreed  accord-  But  either  of  these  are  so  clear  and 

ing  to  the  word  of  God  by  one  general  manifest,  that  there  need  be  no  fear  of 

council,  we  should  need  another  coun-  proceeding  in  infinitum,  and  leaving 

cil ;  and  then  another  to  try  that,  and  the  faith  in  uncertainty  in  necessaries 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  187 

returned  upon  you  again,  If  a  general  council  not  confirmed  Sect.  32. 
by  the  pope  may  err,  (which  you  affirm,)  to  what  end  then  a 
general  council  ?  And  you  may  answer,  Yes :  for  although  a 
general  council  may  err,  yet  the  pope,  as  head  of  the  church, 
cannot.  An  excellent  means  of  unity,  to  have  all  in  the 
church  as  the  pope  will  have  it,  whatever  scripture  say  or 
the  church  think.  And  then,  I  pray,  to  what  end  a  general 
council  \  Will  his  holiness  be  so  holy  as  to  confirm  a  general 
council  if  it  determine  against  him?  And  as  for  Cellar- 
mine's  reasons  why  a  general  council  should  be  useful  if  not 
necessary,  though  the  pope  be  infallible,  they  are  so  weak  in 
part  and  in  part  so  unworthy,  that  I  am  sorry  any  necessity 
of  a  bad  cause  should  force  so  learned  a  man  to  make  use 
of  them. 

III. — Here  A.  C.  tells  me.  "The  caution  mentioned  as  A.  c.  p.  63, 
omitted  makes  my  answer  worse  than  the  Jesuit  related  it ;  4* 
and  that  in  two  things.  First,  in  that  the  Jesuit  relates  it 
thus  :  Although  it  may  err  ;  but  the  caution  makes  it  as  if  it 
did  actually  err.  Secondly,  in  that  the  Jesuit  relates,  that 
we  are  bound  to  hold  it  till  another  come  to  reverse  it ;  that 
is,  we  not  knowing  whether  it  do  err  or  not,  but  only  that  it 
may  err.  But  the  caution  puts  the  case  so,  as  if  the  deter- 
mination of  a  general  council  actually  erring  were  not  ipso 
jure  invalid,  but  must  stand  in  force  and  have  external  obedi- 
ence yielded  to  it,  till  not  only  moral  certainty,  but  evidence 
of  scripture,  or  a  demonstration  to  the  contrary,  make  the 
error  appear ;  and  when  it  appears,  we  must  yield  our  obe- 
dience till  a  council  of  equal  authority  reverse  it,  which  per- 
haps will  not  be  found  in  an  whole  age.  So  either  the  Jesuit 
relates  this  speech  truly  or  less  disgracefully :"  and  A.  C. 
thinks  that  upon  better  judgment  I  will  not  allow  this  cau- 
tion. Truly  I  shall  not  thank  the  Jesuit  for  any  his  kindness 
here ;  and  for  the  caution,  I  must  and  do  acknowledge  it 
mine  even  upon  advisement,  and  that  whether  it  make  my 
answer  worse  or  better.  And  I  think  further,  that  the  Jesuit 
hath  no  great  cause  to  thank  A.  C.  for  this  defence  of  his 

to  salvation.     And  in  curious  specula-     cil.   §.  33.  consid.  5.  num.  1.2. 

tions  it  is  no  matter  whether  there  be         r  Bellarm.    de   Rom.  Pont.   lib.   iv. 

certainty  or  no,  with  or  without  a  coun-     c.  7.  §.  3,  &c. 

138  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  32.  IV. — First  then,  the  Jesuit  (so  says  A.  C.)  doth  in  his 
A.  c.  p.  63-re]a^on  make  it  but  a  supposition,  that  a  general  council  may 
err ;  but  the  caution  expresses  it  as  actually  erring.  True, 
but  yet  I  hope  this  expression  makes  no  general  council 
actually  err;  and  then  it  comes  all  to  one,  whether  I  sup- 
pose that  such  a  council  may  err  or  that  it  do  err.  And  it 
is  fitter  for  clearing  the  difficulties  into  which  the  church  falls 
in  such  a  case,  to  suppose  (and  more  than  a  supposition  it  is 
not)  a  general  council  s actually  erring,  than  as  only  under  a 
possibility  of  erring.  For  the  church  hath  much  more  to  do 
to  vindicate  itself  from  such  an  error  actually  being,  than 
from  any  the  like  error  that  might  be. 

A.  C.  p.  63.  V. — Secondly,  A.  C.  thinks  he  hath  got  great  advantage 
by  the  words  of  the  caution,  in  that  I  say,  "  A  general  coun- 
cil erring  is  to  stand  in  force  and  have  external  obedience," 
at  least  so  far  as  it  consists  in  silence,  patience,  and  forbear- 
ance yielded  to  it,  "  till  evidence  of  scripture,  or  a  demonstra- 
tion to  the  contrary,  make  the  error  appear,  and  until  there- 
upon another  council  of  equal  authority  did  reverse  it." 
Well,  I  say  it  again.  But  is  there  any  one  word  of  mine 
in  the  caution  that  speaks  of  our  knowing  of  this  error  ? 
Surely  not  one,  (that  is  A.  C.'s  addition.)  Now  suppose  a 
general  council  actually  erring  in  some  point  of  divine  truth, 
I  hope  it  will  not  follow  that  this  error  must  be  so  gross  as 
that  forthwith  it  must  needs  be  known  to  private  men.  And 
doubtless  till  they  know  it,  obedience  must  be  yielded ;  nay, 
when  they  know  it,  (if  the  error  be  not  manifestly  against 
fundamental  verity,  in  which  case  a  general  council  cannot 
easily  err,)  I  would  have  A.  C.  and  all  wise  men  consider, 
whether  external  obedience  be  not  even  then  to  be  yielded. 
For  if  controversies  arise  in  the  church,  some  end  they 
must  have,  or  they  will  tear  all  in  sunder ;  and  I  am  sure  no 
wisdom  can  think  that  fit.  Why  then,  say  a  general  council 
err,  and  an  erring  decree  be  ipso  jure,  by  the  very  law  itself 
invalid ;  I  would  have  it  wisely  considered  again,  whether  it 
be  not  fit  to  allow  a  general  council  that  honour  and  privilege 
which  all  other  great  courts  have,  namely,  that  there  be  a 
declaration  of  the  invalidity  of  its  decrees,  as  well  as  of  the 

s  Synodum  generalem  aliquoties  er-     Fidei,  lib.  ii.  Art.  2.  c.  19.  §.  I. 
rasse  percepimus.     Wald.  de  Doctrin. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  189 

laws  of  other  courts,  before  private  men  can  take  liberty  to  Sect.  32. 
refuse  obedience.  For  till  such  a  declaration,  if  the  council 
stand  not  in  force,  A.  C.  sets  up  private  spirits  to  control 
general  councils,  which  is  the  thing  he  so  often  and  so  much 
cries  out  against  in  the  protestants.  Therefore  it  may  seem 
very  fit  and  necessary  for  the  peace  of  Christendom,  that  a 
general  council  thus  erring  should  stand  in  force,  till  evidence 
of  scripture  or  a  demonstration  make  the  error  to  appear, 
as  that  another  council  *  of  equal  authority  reverse  it.  For 
as  for  moral  certainty,  that  is  not  strong  enough  in  points  of 
faith,  (which  alone  are  spoken  of  here.)  And  if  another 
council  of  equal  authority  cannot  be  gotten  together  in  an 
age,  that  is  such  an  inconvenience  as  the  church  must  bear 
when  it  happens.  And  far  better  is  that  inconvenience  than 
this  other,  uthat  any  authority  less  than  a  general  council 
should  rescind  the  decrees  of  it,  unless  it  err  manifestly  and 
intolerably ;  or  that  the  whole  church  upon  peaceable  and 
just  complaint  of  this  error  neglect  or  refuse  to  call  a  council 
and  examine  it,  and  there  come  in  national  or  provincial 
councils  to  x  reform  for  themselves.  But  no  way  must  lie  open 
to  private  men  to  7  refuse  obedience  till  the  council  be  heard 
and  weighed,  as  well  as  that  which  they  say  against  it,  yet 
with  zBellarmine^s  exception  still,  "  so  the  error  be  not  mani- 
festly intolerable  ;"  nor  is  it  fit  for  private  men  in  such  great 
cases  as  this,  upon  which  the  whole  peace  of  Christendom 
depends,  to  argue  thus  :  The  error  appears,  therefore  the 
determination  of  the  council  is  ipso  jure  invalid.  But  this  is 
far  the  safer  way  (I  say  still,  when  the  error  is  neither  funda- 
mental nor  in  itself  manifest)  to  argue  thus  :  The  determina- 
tion is  by  equal  authority,  and  that  secundum  jus,  according 
to  law  declared  to  be  invalid ;  therefore  the  error  appears. 
And  it  is  a  more  humble  and  conscientious  way  for  any 
private  man  to  suffer  a  council  to  go  before  him,  than  for  him 

t  It  is  not  long  since  A.  C.  compared         u  Sect.  33.  consid.  4.  num.  I. 
councils  to  parliaments ;  it  was  but  p.  60.         x  Sect.  24.  num.  I. 
And  I  hope  a  parliament  and  the  acts         y  Sect.  38.  num.  XV. 
of  it  must  stand  in  force,  though  some-         z  Non    est   inferiorum  judicare    an 

thing  be  mistaken  in  them,  or  found  superiores    legitime    procedant    necne, 

hurtful,  till  another  parliament  of  equal  nisi  manifestissime  constet  intolerabilem 

authority  reverse  it  and   them  :  for  I  errorem  committi.     Bellarm.  de  Concil. 

presume  you  will  not  have  any  inferior  lib.  ii.  c.  8.  §.  Alii  dicunt  concilium.— 

authority   to   abrogate   acts   of  parlia-  Nisi  manifesto  constet.  Jac.  Almain  in 

ment.  3.  sent.  D.  24.  q.  unica  fine. 

]90  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect. 32, 33. to  outrun  the  council:  but  weak  and  ignorant  men's  out- 
running both  God  and  his  church,  is  as  bold  a  fault  now  on 
all  sides,  as  the  daring  of  the  times  hath  made  it  common. 
As  for  that  which  I  have  added  concerning  the  possibility 
of  a  general  council's  erring,  I  shall  go  on  with  it  without  ask- 
ing any  further  leave  of  A.  C. 

Sect.  33.  For  upon  this  occasion  I  shall  not  hold  it  amiss  a  little 
more  at  large  to  consider  the  point  of  general  councils,  how 
they  may  or  may  not  err;  and  a  little  to  look  into  the 
Roman  and  protestant  opinion  concerning  them,  which  is 
more  agreeable  to  the  power  and  rule  which  Christ  hath  left 
in  his  church,  and  which  is  most  preservative  of  peace  esta- 
blished, or  ablest  to  reduce  perfect  unity  into  the  church  of 
Christ,  when  that  poor  ship  hath  her  ribs  dashed  in  sunder 
by  the  waves  of  contention.  And  this  I  will  adventure  to 
the  world  but  only  in  the  nature  of  a  consideration,  and  with 
submission  to  my  mother  the  church  of  England,  and  the 
mother  of  us  all,  the  universal  catholic  church  of  Christ,  as  I 
do  most  humbly  all  whatsoever  else  is  herein  contained. 

Consid.  i.  First  then,  I  consider  whether  all  the  power  that  an  oecu- 
menical council  hath  to  determine,  and  all  the  assistance  it 
hath  not  to  err  in  that  determination,  it  hath  it  not  all  from 
the  a  catholic  universal  body  of  the  church  and  clergy  in  the 
church,  b  whose  representative  it  is  ?  And  it  seems  it  hath : 
for  the  government  of  the  church  being  not  c  monarchical  but 
as  Christ  is  the  head,  this  principle  is  inviolable  in  nature : 
Every  body  collective  that  represents,  receives  power  and  pri- 
vileges from  the  body  which  is  represented;  else  a  repre- 
sentation might  have  force  without  the  thing  it  represents, 
which  cannot  be.  So  there  is  no  power  in  the  council,  no 
assistance  to  it,  but  what  is  in  and  to  the  church.  But  yet 
then  it  may  be  questioned  whether  the  representing  body 
hath  dall  the  power,  strength,  and  privilege  which  the  re- 
presented hath?  And  suppose  it  hath  all  the  legal  power, 

a  Si  ecclesiae  universitati  non  est  data  representative,    ut    nostri    loquuntur. 

ulla  authoritas,  ergo  neqne  concilio  ge-  Bellarm.  de  Eccles.  Milit.  lib.  iii.  c.  14. 

nerali,  quatenus  ecclesiam  universalem  §.  3. 
repraesentat.     Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.         c  Sect.  26.  num.  VIII. 
ii.  c.  1 6.  §.  Quod  si  ecclesia.  d  Omnis  repraesentatio  virtu te  minor 

b  Concilium   generale  ecclesiam   re-  est  re  ipsa,  vel  veritate  cujus  represen- 

praesentans.  Jac.  Almain.  in  3.  Sent.  D.  tatio  est.     Colligitur  aperte  ex  Thorn. 

24.   q.   unica. — Episcopi   sunt  ecclesia  i,  2.  q.  101.  A.  2.  ad  2. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  191 

yet  it  hath  not  all  the  natural,  either  of  strength  or  wisdom,  Sect.  33. 
that  the  whole  hath.  Now  because  the  representative  hath 
power  from  the  whole,  and  the  main  body  can  meet  no  other 
way,  therefore  the  acts,  laws,  and  decrees  of  the  represent- 
ative, be  it  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  are  binding  in  their  strength. 
But  they  are  not  so  certain  and  free  from  error  as  is  that 
wisdom  which  resides  in  the  whole :  for  in  assemblies  merely 
civil  or  ecclesiastical,  all  the  able  and  sufficient  men  cannot 
be  in  the  body  that  represents ;  and  it  is  as  possible  so  many 
able6  and  sufficient  men  (for  some  particular  business)  may 
be  left  out,  as  that  they  which  are  in  may  miss,  or  misapply 
that  reason  and  ground  upon  which  the  determination  is 
principally  to  rest.  Here,  for  want  of  a  clear  view  of  this 
ground,  the  representative  body  errs ;  whereas  the  repre- 
sented, by  virtue  of  those  members  which  saw  and  knew  the 
ground,  may  hold  the  principle  inviolated. 

Secondly,  I  consider,  that  since  it  is  thus  in  nature  and  Consid.  2. 
in  civil  bodies,  if  it  be  not  so  in  ecclesiastical  too,  some  rea- 
son must  be  given  why ;  f  for  that  body  also  consists  of  men  : 
those  men  neither  all  equal  in  their  perfections  of  knowledge 
and  judgment,  whether  acquired  by  industry,  or  rooted  in 
nature,  or  infused  by  God.  Not  all  equal,  nor  any  one  of 
them  perfect  and  absolute,  or  freed  from  passion  and  human 
infirmities.  Nor  doth  their  meeting  together  make  them 
infallible  in  all  things,  though  the  act  which  is  hammered  out 
by  many  together  must  in  reason  be  perfecter  than  that 
which  is  but  the  child  of  one  man's  sufficiency.  If  then  a 
general  council  have  no  ground  of  not  erring  from  the  men 
or  the  meeting,  either  it  must  not  be  at  all,  or  it  must  be 
by  some  assistance  and  power  upon  them  when  they  are  so 
met  together ;  and  this,  if  it  be  less  than  the  assistance 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  cannot  make  them  secure  against 

I. — Thirdly,  I  consider,  that  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Consid.  3. 
Ghost  is  without  error:    that  is  no  question;    and  as  little 

e  Posset  enim  contingere  quod  con-  iii.  cap.  13. 

gregati  in  concilio  general!  essent  pauci         f  Ecclesia  est  unum  corpus  mysticum 

et  viles,  tarn  in  re,  quam  in  hominum  per  similitudinem  ad  naturale.  Durand. 

reputatione,    respectu    illorum    qui    ad  3.  D.   14.  q.    2.  num.  5.     Biel.  Lect. 

illud   concilium   generale  minime  con-  23.  in  Can.  Miss, 
venissent,  &c.     Och.  Dial.  par.  3.  lib. 

192  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  there  is  that  a  council  hath  it.  But  the  doubt  that  troubles, 
is,  Whether  all  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost  be  afforded 
in  such  a  high  manner,  as  to  cause  all  the  definitions  of  a 
council  in  matters  fundamental  in  the  faith,  and  in  remote 
deductions  from  it,  to  be  alike  infallible  ?  Now  the  Romanists, 
to  prove  there  is  s  infallible  assistance,  produce  some  places  of 
scripture ;  but  no  one  of  them  infers,  much  less  enforces,  an 
infallibility.  The  places  which  Stapleton  there  rests  upon  are 
these  :  h  /  will  send  you  the  Spirit  of  truth,  which  will  lead  you 
into  all  truth.  And,  i  This  Spirit  shall  abide  with  you  for  ever. 
And,  k  Behold  I  am  with  you  to  the  end  of  the  world.  To  these, 
others  add  !  the  founding  of  the  church  upon  the  rock, 
against  which  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail.  And  Christ's 
prayer  for  St.  Peter,  m  that  his  faith  fail  not.  And  Christ's 
promise,  that  n  where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  his 
name,  he  will  be  in  the  midst  of  them.  And  that  in  the  °  Acts, 
It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  to  us. 

II. — For  the  first,  which  is,  leading  into  all  truth,  and  that 
for  ever.  P  All  is  not  always  universally  taken  in  scripture. 
Nor  is  it  here  simply  for  all  truth :  for  then  a  general  coun- 
cil could  no  more  err  in  matter  of  fact  than  in  matter  of 
faith  ;  in  which  yet  (i  yourselves  grant  it  may  err.  But  into 
all r  truth,  is  a  limited  all;  into  all  truth  absolutely  necessary  to 
salvation  :  and  this,  when  they  suffer  themselves  to  be  led  by 
the  blessed  Spirit,  by  the  word  of  God.  And  all  truth  which 
Christ  had  before  (at  least  fundamentally)  delivered  unto 
them  :  sffe  shall  receive  of  mine,  and  shew  it  unto  you.  And 
again,  t  He  shall  teach  you  all  things,  and  bring  all  things  to  your 
remembrance,  which  I  have  told  you.  And  for  this  necessary 
truth  too,  the  apostles  received  this  promise,  not  for  them- 

S  Omnem  veritatem  infallibiliter  do-  quaestio  est  de  facto,  non  de  jure,  &c. 

cendi,  &c.  Stapl.  Relect.  Praef.  ad  Lee-  In   ejusmodi  judiciis  concilium  errare 

torem.  posse  non  est  dubium. 

h  John  xvi.  13.  r  Dubium  est    an  illud  Docebit  om- 

i  John  xiv.  16.  ma,  S.  Joh.  xiv.  26.  referendum  sit  ad 

k  Matt,  xxviii.  20.  illud,  Quaecunque  dixi  vobis:  quasi  non 

I  Matt.  xvi.  1 8  aliud  docturum  Spiritum  Sanctum  di- 
m  Luke  xxii.  32.  cat,  quam    quod  ipse   antea   docuisset, 

II  Matt,  xviii.  20.  non  repugnabo,  si  quis  ita  velit  inter- 
0  Acts  xv.  28.  pretari,  &c.  MaJdonat.  in  S.  Joh.  xiv. 

p  Prosp.  de  Vocat.  Gent.  lib.  i.  c.  10.         s  John  xvi.  14. 
q  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  8.  §.         t  John  xiv.  26. 
Respondeo  quidam,  where  he  saith,  Ubi 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  193 

selves  and  a  council,  but  for  themselves,  and  the  u  whole  Sect.  33. 
catholic  church ;  of  which  a  council,  be  it  never  so  general,  is 
a  very  little  part.  Yea,  and  this  very  assistance  is  not  so 
absolute,  nor  in  that  manner  to  the  whole  church,  as  it  was 
to  the  apostles ;  neither  doth  Christ  in  that  place  speak 
directly  of  a  council,  but  of  his  apostles1  preaching  and 

III. — As  for  Christ's  being  with  them  unto  the  end  of  the 
world,  the  Fathers  are  so  various,  that  in  the  sense  of  the 
ancient  church  we  may  understand  him  present  in  x  majesty, 
in  y  power,  in  aid  and  z  assistance  against  the  difficulties 
they  should  find  for  preaching  Christ,  which  is  the  native 
sense,  as  I  take  it.  And  this  promise  was  made  to  support 
their  weakness.  As  for  his  presence  in  teaching  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  a  few  mention  it ;  and  no  one  of  them  which  doth 
speaks  of  any  infallible  assistance,  further  than  the  succeed- 
ing church  keeps  to  the  word  of  the  apostles,  as  the  apostles 
kept  to  the  guidance  of  the  Spirit.  Besides,  the  b  Fathers 
refer  their  speech  to  the  church  universal,  not  to  any  council  or 
representative  body.  And  cMaldonate  adds,  "  That  this  his 
presence  by  teaching  is,  or  may  be,  a  collection  from  the  place, 
but  is  not  the  intention  of  Christ.'" 

IV. — For  the  rock  upon  which  the  church  is  founded, 
which  is  the  next  place,  we  dare  not  lay  any  other  foundation 
than  d  Christ :  Christ  laid  his  e  apostles,  no  question,  but  upon 
himself.  With  these  St.  Peter  was  laid,  no  man  questions, 
and  in  prime  place  of  order,  (would  his  claiming  successors 
be  content  with  that,)  as  appears,  and  divers  Fathers  witness, 
by  his  particular  designment,  Tu  es  Petrus;  but  yet  the  rod- 
even  there  spoken  of,  is  not  St.  Peter's  person,  either  only,  or 
properly,  but  the  faith  which  he  professed.  And  to  this,  be- 

u  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  9.  §.  a  S.  Cyril,  lib.  vii.    Dial,  de  Trin. 

Alteram.     Assistentia  Sp.  Sancti   non  Prosp.  Epist.  ad  Demetriadem. 

est  propter  concil.    sed  universam   ec-  b  S.  Hilar.  in  Psal.  cxxiv.    S.  Cyril, 

clesiam.  lib.  vii.  de  Trin.  S.  Aug.  6.  de  Gen.  ad 

x  S.  August.  Tr.  50.  in  S.  Joh.  Isi-  Lit.  c.  8.    S.  Leo,   Serm.   10.  de  Nat. 

dor.  I.  Sent.  cap.  14.  Dom.  c.  5.  Isid.  in  Jos.  c.  12.     In  all 

yS.  Hilar.  in  Psal.  cxxiv.  Justin.  Mar-  which  places,  vobiscum  is  either  inter- 

tyr.  Dial,  cum  Tryphone.  Prosp.  Epist.  preted  cum  mis,  or  fidelibus,  or  imiver- 

ad  Demetriadem.  sa  ecclesia. 

*  S.  Hilar.  in  Psal.  cxxiv.  Prosp.  de  c  Hoc  colligitur,  sed  quaeritur  non 

Vocat.  Gent.  lib.  ii.  cap.  2.  Leo  Serm.  2.  quid  colligitur,  sed  quid  dicere  vomit, 

de  Resurrect.  Dom,  cap.  3.  Isidor.   in  Maldonat.  in  S.  Matt,  xxviii. 

Jos.  c.  20.  d  i  Cor.  iii.  1 1.       e  Ephes.  ii.  20. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  sides  the  evidence  which  is  in  text  and  truth,  the  f  Fathers 
come  in  with  very  full  consent.  And  this,  that  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail  against  it,  is  not  spoken  of  the  not  erring  of 
the  church  principally,  but  of  the  Snot  falling  away  of  it  from 
the  foundation.  Now  a  church  may  err,  and  dangerously  too, 
and  yet  not  fall  from  the  foundation ;  especially  if  that  of 
hBellarmine  be  true,  "  That  there  are  many  things,  even  de 
fide,  of  the  faith,  which  yet  are  not  necessary  to  salvation." 
Besides,  even  here  again,  the  promise  of  this  stable  edifica- 
tion is  to  the  whole  church,  not  to  a  council,  at  least  no 
further  than  a  council  builds  as  a  church  is  built,  that  is,  upon 

V. — The  next  place  is  Christ's  prayer  for  St.  Peter's  faith. 
The  native  sense  of  which  place  is,  that  Christ  prayed,  and 
obtained  for  St.  Peter  perseverance  in  the  grace  of  God  against 
the  strong  temptation  which  was  to  winnow  him  above  the 
rest.  But  to  conclude  an  infallibility  hence  in  the  pope,  or 
in  his  chair,  or  in  the  Roman  see,  or  in  a  general  council, 
though  the  pope  be  president,  I  find  no  one  ancient  Father 

f  S.  Ignat.  Epist.  ad  Philadelph.  Qui 
suam  firmavit  ecclesiam  super  petram, 
aedificatione  spirituali — S.  Hilar.  lib.  vi. 
de  Trin.  Super  hanc  igitur  confessio- 
nis  petram  ecclesiae  aedificatio  est.  Et 
paulo  post :  Haec  fides  ecclesiae  funda- 
mentum  est. — S.  Greg.  Nyss.  ad  Trin. 
adversus  Judfeos :  Super  hanc  petram 
eedificabo  ecclesiam  meam,  super  con- 
fessionem  videlicet  Christi. — S.  Isid. 
Pelus.  Epist.  lib.  i.  epist.  235.  Ut  hac 
ratione  certam  omnibus  confessionem 
traderet,  quam  ab  eo  inspiratus  Petrus 
tanquam  basin  ac  fundamentum  jecit, 
super  quod  Dominus  ecclesiam  suam 
extruxit. — S.  Cyril.  Alexand.  de  Trin. 
lib.  iv.  Petram  opinor  per  agnomina- 
tionem,  aliud  nihil  quam  inconcussam  et 
firmissimam  discipuli  fidem  vocavit,  in 
qua  ecclesia  Christi  ita  fundata  et  firmata 
esset,  ut  non  laberetur,  &c — B.  Theo- 
dor.  in  Cant,  petram  appellat  fidei  pie- 
tatem,  veritatis  professionem,  &c.  Et 
super  hanc  petram  cediftcabo  ecclesiam 
meam. — S.  Greg.  Epist.  lib.  iii.  ep.  33. 
In  vera  fide  persistite,  et  vitam  vestram 
in  petram  ecclesiae,  hoc  est,  in  confes- 
sione  B.  Petri  apostolorum  principis 
solidatae. — Theophylact.  in  Matth  xvi. 
Super  eum  aedificavit  ecclesiam,  quia 
enim  confessus  erat,  &c.  quod  haec  con- 

fessio  fundamentum  erit,  &c. — S.  Aug. 
in  I  Epist.  S.  Johan.  tract.  10.  Quid 
est.  Super  hanc  petram  ?  Super  hanc 
fidem,  super  id  quod  dictum  est,  Tu  es, 

&c S.  Bas.  Seleuc.  Orat.  25.  Hanc 

confessionem  cum  nominasset  Christus 
petram,  Petrum  nuncupat  eum  qui 
prirnum  illam  est  confessus,  donans  illi 
hanc  appellationem  tanquam  insigne,  et 
monumentum  hujus  confessionis.  Haec 
enim  est  revera  pietatis  petra,  haec  sa- 
lutis  basis,  &c. — S.  Jacob.  Liturg.  'ETTI 
r^]v  irerpav  TTJS  irlffrewS)  p.  26,  &c. 
And  some  which  join  the  person  of  St. 
Peter,  profess  it  is  propter  robur  con- 
fessionis, Justin.  Mart.  Dial. cum  Tryph. 
S.  Chrysost.  Horn.  2.  in  Psal.  L  S. 
Ambros.  lib.  x.  in  S.  Luc.  xxiv.  And 
St.  Gregory  gives  it  for  a  rule,  when  pe- 
tra is  read  in  the  singular  number,  (and 
so  it  is  here,)  Christus  est,  Christ  is 

S  Non  deficit,  S.  Bernard.  Serm.  79. 
in  Cant.  And  Bellarmine  himself  going 
to  prove  ecclesiam  non  posse  deficere, 
begins  with  this  very  place  of  scripture, 
de  Eccles.  lib.  iii.  c.  13. 

h  De  Eccl.  lib.  iii.  c.  14.  §.  Quinto 
si  esset.  Multa  sunt  de  fide,  quae  non 
sunt  absolute  necessaria  ad  salutem. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  195 

that  dare  adventure  it.  And  iBellarmine  himself,  beside  some  Sect.  33. 
popes  in  their  own  cause,  (and  that  in  epistles  counterfeit,  or 
falsely  alleged,)  hath  not  a  Father  to  name  for  this  sense  of 
the  place  till  he  come  down  to  Chrysologus,  Theophylact,  and 
St.  Bernard  :  of  which  Chrysologus  his  speech  is  but  a  flash  of 
rhetoric  ;  and  the  other  two  are  men  of  yesterday  compared 
with  antiquity,  and  lived  when  (it  was  God's  great  grace,  and 
learned  men's  wonder)  the  corruption  of  the  time  had  not  made 
them  corrupter  than  they  are.  And  k  Thomas  is  resolute, 
that  what  is  meant  here  beyond  St.  Peter's  person  is  referred 
to  the  whole  church.  And  the  gloss  upon  the  canon  law  is 
more  peremptory  than  he,  even  to  the  denial  that  it  is 
1  meant  of  the  pope.  And  if  this  place  warrant  not  the  pope's 
faith,  where  is  the  infallibility  of  the  council,  that  in  your 
doctrine  depends  upon  it  ? 

VI. — The  next  place  is  Bellarmine's  choice  one,  and  his 
first;  and  he  says  it  is  a  "  m proper  place  for  proof  of  the 
infallibility  of  general  councils."  This  place  is  Christ's  pro- 
mise :  n  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them.  And  he  tells  us,  "  The 
strength  of  the  argument  is  not  taken  from  these  words  alone, 
but  as  they  are  continued  with  the  former ;"  and  "  °that  the 
argument  is  drawn  a  minori  ad  majus,  from  the  less  to  the 
greater."  Thus :  "  Plf  two  or  three  gathered  together  in  my 
name  do  always  obtain  that  which  they  ask  at  God's  hands, 
to  wit,  wisdom  and  knowledge  of  those  things  which  are 
necessary  for  them ;  how  much  more  shall  all  the  bishops  ga- 
thered together  (in  a  council)  always  obtain  wisdom  and  know- 
ledge to  judge  those  things  which  belong  to  the  direction  of 
the  whole  church !"  I  answer ;  First,  it  is  most  true,  that  here  is 
little  strength  in  these  words  alone.  For,  though  the  Fathers 

i  De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  0.3.  debet  hue   proprie  accommodari.     Va- 
le 2.  2».q.  2.  A.  3.  Probat  enim  ex  his  lentia  in  Thorn,  torn.  iii.  Disput.  i.  R. 

verbis,    fidem  ecclesiae  universalis  non  i.  Puncto  7.  §.  45. 

posse  deficere.  "  Matt,  xviii.  19,  20. 

1  Causa  24.  q.  i.  C.  A  recta.     Non  o  Addita  argnmentatione  a  minori  ad 

de  papa,  quia  papa  potest  errare.  majus,  &c.  Bellarrn.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii. 

m  Testimonia  propria  sunt  tria.  Pri-  c.  i.  §.  4.     Et  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.   6. 

mum  est  Matt,  xviii.,  &c.    Bellarm.  de  q.  3.  A.  4. 

Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  2.  §.  4. — Sed    contra,  p  Si  duo  vel  ires  congregate  in  no- 

firmitas  conciliorum  proprie  non  inni-  mine  meo  obtinent  semper  quod  petunt 

titur  his  verbis.    Stapl.  Relect.  Contro-  a  Deo,  &c.  Bellarm.  ibid.  §.  5. 

vers.  6.  q.  4.  A.  4.  ad  4. — Locus  hie  non 

O  2 

196  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  make  different  interpretations  of  this  place  of  scripture,  yet 
qmost  of  them  agree  in  this,  that  this  place  is  to  be  under- 
stood of  consent  in  prayer ;  and  this  is  manifest  enough  in 
the  text  itself.  Secondly,  I  think  there  is  as  little  strength 
in  them  by  the  argument  drawn  a  minori  ad  majus  :  and  that 
I  prove  two  ways  ;  first,  because  though  that  argument  hold 
in  natural  and  necessary  things,  yet  I  doubt  it  holds  not 
either  in  voluntary  or  promised  things,  or  things  which  de- 
pend upon  their  institution.  For  he  that  promises  the  less, 
doth  not  hereby  promise  the  greater ;  and  he  which  will  do 
the  less,  will  not  always  do  the  greater.  Secondly,  because 
this  argument  from  the  less  to  the  greater  can  never  follow, 
but  where  and  so  far  as  the  thing  upon  which  the  argument 
is  founded  agrees  to  the  less ;  for  if  it  do  not  always  agree 
to  the  less,  it  cannot  necessarily  pass  from  thence  to  the 
greater.  Now  that  upon  which  this  argument  is  grounded 
here  is,  infallible  hearing  and  granting  the  prayers  of  two  or 
three  met  together  in  the  name  of  Christ.  But  this  infalli- 
bility is  not  always  found  in  this  less  congregation,  where  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together.  For  they  often  meet  and 
pray,  yet  obtain  not,  because  "  there  are  divers  other  con- 
ditions necessarily  required,"  as  St. Chrysostom r observes,  "to 
make  the  prayers  of  a  congregation  heard,  beside  their  ga- 
thering together  in  the  name  of  Christ."  And  therefore  it  is 
not  extended  to  a  greater  congregation  or  council,  unless  the 
same  conditions  be  still  observed.  Neither  doth  Christ's  pro- 
mise, Ero  in  medio,  I  will  be  in  the  midst  of  them,  infer  that 
they,  the  greater  or  the  less,  three  or  three  hundred,  have 
all,  even  s  necessary  things,  infallibly  granted  unto  them  as  oft 
as  they  ask,  if  they  ask  not  as  well  as  they  ought  as  what 

q  S.  Chrys.  Hom.6i.  in  S.  Matt,  xviii.  mine  Christi.     Sed,  &c.  lib.  iv.  de  No- 

Ubi  duo  vel  tres  pan  spiritu  et  volun-  tis  Ecclesiae,  c.  2.  §.  Tertius  non. 

tate  collect!  sunt,  &c.     Theoph.  in  S.  s  Etsi  Christus  adsit  in  medio  talium 

Matt,  xviii.  S.  Cyprian,  lib.  iv.  epist.  4.  non  adest  tamen  ad  omnem  effectum, 

S.  Hilar.  in  S.  Matt,  xviii.  aut  ad  hunc  qui  est  judicare  de  fide. 

r  Quomodo  igitur  a  Patre  cuncta  non  Stapl.  Relect.  Controv.  6.  q.  3.  A.  4 — 

consequentur  ?   Quia  multae  sunt  cau-  Sed  nee  illi  semper  ad  Deum  respiciunt 

sae  non   impetrandi,    &c.   S.  Chrysost.  qui  in  medio  eorum  est.     Nee  Dens  sic 

Horn,  in  S.  Matt,  xviii.   Et  Bellarm.  adest  iis  qui  respiciunt  ad  ipsum,  ut 

ipse  :    Si  congregari  in  nomine  Christi  omnem  veritatem  doceat  in  instanti  et 

sit  nota  ecclesiae,  non  erit  quomodocun-  omni  tempore   simul,   &c.    Junius  in 

que  congregari.     Sic  enim  omnes  hae-  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  2. 
reses,  et  schismata  congregantur  in  no- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  197 

they  ought.  And  yet  most  true  it  is,  that  where  more  or  Sect.  33. 
fewer  are  gathered  together  in  the  name  of  Christ,  there  is 
he  in  the  midst  of  them ;  but  to  assist  and  to  grant  whatso- 
ever he  shall  find  fit  for  them,  not  infallibly  whatsoever  they 
shall  think  fit  to  ask  for  themselves.  And  therefore  St.  Cy- 
prian, though  he  use  this  very  argument  a  minori  ad  ma- 
jus,  from  the  less  to  the  greater,  yet  he  presumes  not  to 
extend  it,  as  Bellarmine  doth,  to  the  obtaining  of  infallibility ; 
but  only  useth  it  in  the  general  way,  in  which  there  neither 
is  nor  can  be  doubt  of  the  truth  of  it :  thus :  "  tjf  two  that 
are  of  one  mind  to  God- ward  can  do  so  much,  what  might 
be  done  if  there  were  unanimity  among  all  Christians  f 
Undoubtedly  more,  but  not  all  whatsoever  they  should  ask, 
unless  all  other  requisites  were  present.  Thirdly,  in  this  their 
own  u  great  champions  disagree  from  Bellarmine,  or  he  from 
them.  For  Gregory  de  Valentia  and  Stapleton  tell  us, 
"  That  this  place  doth  not  belong  properly  to  prove  an  infal- 
lible certainty  of  any  sentence,  in  which  more  agree  in  the 
name  of  Christ ;  but  to  the  efficacy  of  consent  for  obtaining 
that  which  more  shall  pray  for  in  the  name  of  Christ,  if  at 
least  that  be  for  their  soul's  health.  For  else  you  may  prove 
out  of  this  place,  that  not  only  the  definition  of  a  general 
council,  but  even  of  a  provincial,  nay,  of  two  or  three  bi- 
shops gathered  together,  is  valid,  and  that  without  the 
pope's  assent." 

VII. — The  last  place  mentioned  for  the  infallibility  of 
general  councils  is  that,  Acts  xv.,  where  the  apostles  say  of 
themselves  and  the  council  held  by  them,  KIt  seems  good  to 
the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us.  And  they  might  well  say  it ;  for 
they  had  infallibly  the  assistance  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  they 
kept  close  to  his  direction.  But  I  do  not  find  that  any  ge- 

t  Si  duo  unanimes  tantum  possunt,  Greg,  de  Valen.  torn.  ii.  in  Thorn.  Dis- 

quid  si  unanimitas  apud  omnes  esset?  put.  i.  q.  i.  puiict.  7.  §.45.    And  al- 

S.  Cypr.  lib.  iv.  epist.  4.  though   Stapleton  approves  this  argu- 

u   Non  ad  infallibilem  certitudinem  ment  a  minori  ad  majus,  yet  withal  he 

alicujus   sententiae,  in  quam  plures  in  says,  Firmitas  conciliorura  illis  Christi 

nomine   Christi  consentiunt,  locus  hie  verbis  proprie  non  innititur ;  quia  nee 

evangelii    proprie   accommodari   debet,  Christus  ibi  de  conciliis  episcoporum  lo- 

sed  ad  efficaciam  consensionis  plurium  quitur,  sed  de  quavis  fidelium  unanimi 

ad  id  impetrandum,  quod  unanimiter  in  congregatione.     Nee   etsi,    &c.     Stapl. 

Christi  nomine  petunt,  si  id  quidem  ad  Relect.  Controv.  6.  q.  6.  A.  4. 
eorum  salutem  expediat.     Secus  enim         x  Acts  xv.  28. 
non  modo  ex  illo  loco  probabitur,  &c. 


198  ArcJibisJiop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  neral  council  since,  though  they  did  implore  (as  they  ought) 
the  assistance  of  that  blessed  Spirit,  did  ever  take  upon  them 
to  say,  in  terminis,  in  express  terms  of  their  definitions,  Vi- 
sum  est  Spiritui  Sancto  et  nobis ;  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  to  us.  Acknowledging  even  thereby  (as  I  con- 
ceive) a  great  deal  of  difference  in  the  certainty  of  those 
things  which  a  general  council  at  after  determined  in  the 
church,  and  those  which  were  settled  by  the  apostles  when 
they  sat  in  council.  But  though  I  do  not  find  that  they  used 
this  speech  punctually  and  in  terms,  yet  the  Fathers,  when 
they  met  in  council,  were  confident,  and  spake  it  out,  that 
they  had  assistance  from  the  Holy  Ghost ;  yet  so  as  that 
they  neither  took  themselves  nor  the  councils  they  sat  in  as 
infallibly  guided  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  the  apostles  were. 
And  Valentia  is  very  right :  "  yThat  though  the  council  say 
they  are  gathered  together  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  yet  the  Fathers 
are  neither  arrogant  in  using  the  speech,  nor  yet  infallible  for 
all  that.""  And  this  is  true,  whether  the  pope  approve  or 
disapprove  their  definitions,  though  Valentia  will  not  admit 
that :  the  pope  must  be  (with  him)  infallible,  whatever  come 
of  it.  Now  though  this  be  but  an  example,  and  include  no 
precept,  yet  both  zStapleton  and  aBellarmine  make  this  place 
a  proper  proof  of  the  infallibility  of  general  councils.  And 
bStapleton  says,  "  The  decrees  of  councils  are  the  very  oracles 
of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  which  is  little  short  of  blasphemy.  And 
cBellarmine  adds,  "  That  because  all  other  councils  borrowed 
their  form  from  this,  therefore  other  lawful  councils  may 
affirm  also  that  their  decrees  are  the  decrees  of  the  Holy 
Ghost;11 — little  considering  therewhile,  that  it  is  one  thing 
to  borrow  the  form,  and  another  thing  to  borrow  the  cer- 
tainty and  the  infallibility  of  a  council.  For  suppose  that 
after-councils  did  follow  the  form  of  that  first  council  exactly 

-v  Quintum   argumentnm,  &c.    Aut  tertium  e  propriis.    De  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c. 

sunt  ergo  arrogantes,  quod  putandum  2.  §.  Tertius  locus, 
iion    est,    aut    infallibiliter    definiunt.         b  Conciliorum  decreta  sunt  Spiritus 

Responded    Valentia   concedendo   neu-  Sancti    oracula.    Stapl.  ibid.  Sententia 

trum  :  torn.  iii.  in  Thorn.  Disp.  i.  q.  i.  orthodoxa  prima. 
punct.^7.  §.  45.  c  Si  illud  concilium  ex  quo  formam 

z    Firmitas   eorum  nititur    exemplo  acceperunt   omnia  alia  concilia  asserit 

primi  coricilii.    Stapl.   Relect.  Cont.  6.  decreta  sua  esse  decreta  Spiritus  Sancti, 

q.  3.  A.  4.  ad  3.  certe  idem  asserere  possunt  caetera  legi- 

a  Et  Bellarm.  dicit  locum  hunc  esse  tima  concilia,  &c.  Bellarm.  ibid. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  199 

in  all  circumstances,  yet  I  hope  no  advised  man  will  say,  Sect.  33. 
there  is  the  like  infallibility  in  other  councils,  where  no  man 
sat  that  was  inspired,  as  was  in  this,  where  all  that  sat  as 
judges  were  inspired.  Or  if  any  Jesuit  will  be  so  bold  as  to 
say  it,  he  had  need  bring  very  good  proof  for  it,  and  far 
better  than  any  is  brought  yet.  Now  that  all  councils  are 
not  so  infallible  as  was  this  of  the  apostles,  nor  the  causes 
handled  in  them  as  there  they  were,  is  manifest  by  done  of 
their  own ;  who  tells  us  plainly,  "  That  the  apostles  in  their 
council  dealt  very  prudently,  did  not  precipitate  their  judg- 
ment, but  weighed  all  things.  For  in  matters  of  faith,  and 
which  touch  the  conscience,  it  is  not  enough  to  say,  Volumus 
et  mandamus,  We  will  and  command.  And  thus  the  apostles 
met  together  in  simplicity  and  singleness,  seeking  nothing  but 
God,  and  the  salvation  of  men.  And  what  wonder  if  the 
Holy  Ghost  were  present  in  such  a  council?  Nos  aliter,  &c.  But 
we  meet  otherwise,  in  great  pomp,  and  seek  ourselves ;  and 
promise  ourselves,  that  we  may  do  any  thing  out  of  the  ple- 
nitude of  our  power.  And  how  can  the  Holy  Ghost  allow 
of  such  meetings  f  And  if  not  allow  or  approve  the  meetings, 
then  certainly  not  concur  to  make  every  thing  infallible  that 
shall  be  concluded  in  them. 

VIII. — And  for  all  the  places  together,  weigh  them  with 
indifferency,  and  either  they  speak  of  the  church  (including 
the  apostles)  as  all  of  them  do ;  and  then  all  grant  the  voice 
of  the  church  is  God's  voice,  divine  and  infallible :  or  else 
they  are  general,  unlimited,  and  appliable  to  private  assem- 
blies as  well  as  general  councils ;  which  none  grant  to  be  in- 
fallible but  some  mad  enthusiasts.  Or  else  they  are  limited, 
not  simply  into  all  truth,  but  all  necessary  to  salvation ;  in 
which  I  shall  easily  grant  a  general  council  cannot  err,  suf- 
fering itself  to  be  led  by  this  Spirit  of  truth  in  the  scripture, 
and  not  taking  upon  it  to  lead  both  the  scripture  and  the 
Spirit.  For  suppose  these  places,  or  any  other,  did  promise 

d  Vide  quam  prudenter,  agunt  non  &c.     Quid  igitur  mirum  si  in  hoc  con- 

praecipitant  sententiam,  sed  singula  ex-  cilio  fuerit  Spiritus  Sanctus  ?    &c.   Nos 

pendunt.     In  rebus  enim  fidei  et  quae  aliter  convenimus,  nempe  cum  magna 

conscientiam  tangunt,  non  satis  est  di-  pompa,  nosque  ipsos  quserimus  ;    atque 

cere,    Volumus   et  mandamus.      Vides  nobis  pollicemur  nihil  nobis  non  licere 

igitur    quomodo    conveniunt    apostoli,  de  plenitudine  potestatis.     Et  quomodo 

simpliciter  conveniunt,  nihil  nisi  Deum  Spiritus  Sanctus  ejusmodi  concilia  pro- 

quaerunt,  et  aliorum  salutem  expetunt,  bare  possit  ?    Ferus  in  Act.  xv.  7. 

o  4 

200  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  assistance  even  to  infallibility,  yet  they  granted  it  not  to 
every  general  council,  but  to  the  catholic  body  of  the  church 
itself;  and  if  it  be  in  the  whole  church  principally,  then  is  it 
in  a  general  council,  but  by  consequence,  as  the  council  re- 
presents the  whole ;  and  that  which  belongs  to  a  thing  by 
consequent  doth  not  otherwise  nor  longer  belong  unto  it 
than  it  consents  and  cleaves  to  that  upon  which  it  is  a 
consequent.  And  therefore  a  general  council  hath  not  this 
assistance,  but  as  it  keeps  to  the  whole  church  and  spouse 
of  Christ,  whose  it  is  to  hear  his  word  and  determine  by  it ; 
and  therefore  if  a  general  council  will  go  out  of  the  church's 
way,  it  may  easily  go  without  the  church's  truth. 
Consid.  4.  I. — Fourthly,  I  consider  that  all  agree,  that  the  church  in 
general  can  never  err  from  the  faith  necessary  to  salvation : 
no  persecution,  no  temptation,  no  e gates  of  hell  (whatsoever 
is  meant  by  them)  can  ever  so  prevail  against  it :  for  all  the 
members  of  the  militant  church  cannot  err,  either  in  the 
whole  faith  or  in  any  article  of  it ;  it  is  impossible.  For  if  all 
might  so  err,  there  could  be  no  union  between  them  as  mem- 
bers and  Christ  the  head ;  and  no  union  between  head  and 
members,  no  body,  and  so  no  church,  which  cannot  be  :  but 
there  is  not  the  like  consent,  that  fgeneral  councils  cannot 
err.  And  it  seems  strange  to  me,  the  Fathers  having  to  do 
with  so  many  heretics,  and  so  many  of  them  opposing  church 
authority,  that  in  the  condemnation  of  those  heretics  this 
proposition,  even  in  terms,  A  general  council  cannot  err, 
should  not  be  found  in  any  one  of  them  that  I  can  yet  see. 
Now  suppose  it  were  true,  that  no  general  council  had  erred 
in  any  matter  of  moment  to  this  day,  which  will  not  be  found 
true,  yet  this  would  not  have  followed,  that  it  is  therefore 
infallible  and  cannot  err.  I  have  no  time  to  descend  into 
particulars,  therefore  to  the  general  still.  St.  Augustine  hputs 
a  difference  between  the  rules  of  scripture  and  the  definitions 
of  men.  This  difference  is,  Prceponitur  scriptum,  that  the 
scripture  hath  the  prerogative.  "  That  prerogative  is,  that 
whatsoever  is  found  written  in  scripture  may  neither  be 

e  Matt.  xvi.  28.  Fid.  lib.  ii.  Art.  2.  c.  19.  §.  i — Sect.  38. 

f  Ecclesia  universalis  fidem  habet  in-  num.  IV. 

defectibilem,  &c.    Non  quidem  in  gene-         h  S.  August,  de  Bapt.  contra  Donat. 

rali  synodo  congregata,  quam  aliquoties  lib.  ii.  cap.  3. 
errasse  percepimus,  &c.    Wald.  Doct. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  201 

doubted  nor  disputed  whether  it  be  true  or  right.  But  the  Sect.  33. 
letters  of  bishops  may  not  only  be  disputed,  but  corrected  by 
bishops  that  are  more  learned  and  wise  than  they,  or  by 
national  councils,  and  national  councils  by  plenary  or  gene- 
ral :  and  even  5  plenary  councils  themselves  may  be  amended, 
the  former  by  the  latter."  It  seems  it  was  no  news  with  St. 
Augustine  that  a  general  council  might  err,  and  therefore 
inferior  to  the  scripture,  which  may  neither  be  doubted  nor 
disputed  where  it  affirms.  And  if  it  be  so  with  the  definition 
of  a  council  too,  (as  k  Stapleton  would  have  it,)  that  they  may 
neither  be  doubted  nor  disputed,  where  is  then  the  scrip- 
ture's prerogative? 

II. — I  know  there  is  much  shifting  about  this  place,  but 
it  cannot  be  wrastled  off.  Stapleton  says  first,  that  St. 
Augustine  speaks  of  the  rules  of  manners  and  discipline,  and 
this  is  Bellarmine's  last  shift :  both  are  out,  and  Bellarmine 
in  a  contradiction.  Bellarmine  in  a  contradiction;  for  first 
he  tells  us  "  general  councils  cannot  err  in  m  precepts  of  man- 
ners ;"  and  then,  to  turn  off  St.  Augustine  in  this  place,  he 
tells  us,  that  if  St.  Augustine  doth  not  speak  of  matter  of 
fact,  but  of  right  and  of  universal  questions  of  right,  then  is 
he  to  be  understood  of  "precepts  of  manners,  not  of  points 
of  faith :  where  he  hath  first  run  himself  upon  a  contradic- 
tion, and  then  we  have  gained  this  ground  upon  him,  that 
either  his  answer  is  nothing,  or  else  against  his  own  state 
of  the  question,  "  A  general  council  can  err  in  precepts  of 
manners."  So  belike,  when  Bellarmine  is  at  a  shift,  a  gene- 
ral council  can  and  cannot  err  in  precepts  of  manners.  And 
both  are  out :  for  the  whole  dispute  of  St.  Augustine  is 
against  the  error  of  St.  Cyprian,  followed  by  the  Donatists, 
which  was  an  error  in  faith ;  namely,  "  That  true  baptism 
could  not  be  given  by  heretics,  and  such  as  were  out  of 
the  church."  And  the  proof  which  Stapleton  and  Bellarmine 
draw  out  of  the  subsequent  words  ("  °when  by  any  experi- 
ment of  things  that  which  was  shut  is  opened")  is  too  weak; 

i  Ipsaque  plenaria  ssepe  priora  a  pos-  Relect.  Cont.  6.  q.  3.  A.  4. 
terioribus  emendari.  m  De  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  2.  princip. 

k  Vox  ecclesiae  talis  est,  ut  non  de         n  Ibid.  cap.  7.  §.  Potest  etiam. 
ea  judicemus  rectene  an  secus  docuerit.         o  Quando  aliquo  rerum  experimento, 

So  Stapl.  Relect.  c.  4.  q.  i.  A.  i.  quod  clausum  erat,  aperitur, 

1  De  regulis  morum  et  disciplina. 

Ar Mishap  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  for  experiment  there  is  not  of  fact,  nor  are  the  words  con- 
clusum  est  as  if  it  were  of  a  rule  of  discipline  concluded,  as 
Stapleton  cites  them,  but  a  further  experiment  or  proof  of 
the  question  in  hand,  and  pertaining  to  faith  which  was 
then  shut  up,  and,  as  St.  Augustine  after  speaks,  P  wrapped 
up  in  cloudy  darkness. 

III. — Next,  Stapleton  ^will  have  it,  that  if  St.  Augustine 
do  speak  of  a  cause  of  faith,  then  his  meaning  is,  that  later 
general  councils  can  mend,  that  is,  explicate  more  perfectly 
that  faith  which  lay  hid  in  the  seed  of  ancient  doctrine.  He 
makes  instance,  that  about  the  divinity  of  Christ,  the  council 
of  Ephesus  explicated  the  first  of  Nice ;  Chalcedon,  both  of 
them;  Constantinople,  Chalcedon :  and  then  concludes,  "  rin  all 
which  things  none  of  (these)  councils  taught  that  which  was 
erroneous."  An  excellent  conclusion :  these  councils  and  these 
in  this  thing  taught  no  error,  and  were  only  explained ;  there- 
fore no  council  can  err  in  any  matter  of  faith ;  or,  therefor* 
St.  Augustine  speaks  not  of  an  emendation  of  error,  but  of 
an  explanation  of  sense ;  whereas  every  eye  sees  neither  of 
these  can  follow. 

IV. — Now  that  St.  Augustine  meant  plainly,  that  even  a 
plenary  council  might  err,  and  that  s  often,  (for  that  is  his 
word,)  and  that  in  matter  of  faith,  and  might  and  ought  so 
to  be  amended  in  a  later  council,  I  think,  will  thus  appear. 
First,  his  word  is  emendari,  to  be  amended  ;  which  properly 
supposes  for  error  and  faultiness,  not  explanation.  And  St. 
Augustine  needed  not  to  go  to  a  word  of  such  a  l forced  sense, 
nor  sure  would,  especially  in  a  disputation  against  adversa- 
ries. Next,  St.  Augustine's  dispute  is  against  St.  Cyprian 
and  the  council  held  at  Carthage,  about  baptism  by  heretics  ; 
in  which  point  that  national  council  erred,  (as  now  all  agree.) 
And  St.  Augustine's  deduction  goes  on,  Scripture  cannot  be 
other  than  right,  that  is,  the  prerogative  of  it ;  but  bishops 

P  Ibid.  c.  4.  Nebulis  involuta.  s  Saepe. 

Q  Sensus  est,  quod  concilia  posteriora  t  Not  used,  but  either  for  corrigere 

emendant,  id  est,  perfectius  explicaut  or  auferre :  and  so  St.  Augustine  uses 

fidem  in  semine  antiquae  doctrinae  la-  the  word,  Contra  Faust,  lib.  xx.  c.  21. 

tentem,  &c.  Stapl.  Relect.  Contr.  6.  And  Bellarmirie,  though  he  interpret  it 

q.  3.  A.  4.  in  matter  of  fact,  yet  equals  the  word 

r  Qua  in  re  nihil  erroneum  ullum  with  correxit,  de  Concil.1.2.  c.  8.§.  Re- 
concilium  docuit,  &c.  spond.  Quaest. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  203 

may,  and  be  u  reprehended  for  it,  if  peradventure  they  xerr  Sect.  33. 
from  the  truth  ;  and  that  either  by  more  learned  bishops,  or 
by  provincial  councils.  Here  reprehension,  and  that  for  de- 
viation from  the  truth,  is  (I  hope)  emendation  properly,  and 
not  explanation  only.  Then  provincial  councils,  they  must 
y  yield  to  general :  and  to  yield  is  not  in  case  of  explanation 
only.  Then  it  follows,  that  even  plenary  councils  themselves 
may  be  amended,  the  former  by  the  later;  still  retaining 
that  which  went  before,  "  if  peradventure  they  erred,  or  made 
deviation  from  the  truth."  And  if  this  be  not  so,  I  would  fain 
know  why  in  one  and  the  same  tenor  of  words,  in  one  and 
the  same  continuing  argument  and  deduction  of  St.  Augus- 
tine, repreJiendi  should  be  in  proper  sense,  and  a  veritate 
deviatum  in  proper  sense,  and  cedere  in  proper  sense,  and 
only  emendari  should  not  be  proper,  but  stand  for  an  expla- 
nation ?  If  you  say  the  reason  is,  because  the  former  words 
are  applied  to  men  and  national  councils,  both  which  may 
err,  but  this  last  to  general  councils,  which  cannot  err ;  this 
is  most  miserable  begging  of  the  principle  and  thing  in 

V. — Again ;  St.  Augustine  concludes  there,  that  the  general 
council  preceding  may  be  amended  by  general  councils  that 
follow,  "  z  when  that  is  known  which  lay  hid  before."  Not  as 
Stapleton  would  have  it,  lay  hid  as  in  the  seed  of  ancient 
doctrine  only,  and  so  needed  nothing  but  explanation ;  but 
hid  in  some  darkness  or  ambiguity,  which  led  the  former  into 
error  and  mistaking,  as  appears :  for  St.  Augustine  would 
have  this  amendment  made  without  sacrilegious  pride,  doubt- 
less of  insulting  upon  the  former  council  that  was  to  be 
amended;  and  without  swelling  arrogancy,  sure  against  the 
weakness  in  the  former  council ;  and  without  contention  of 
envy,  which  uses  to  accompany  man's  frailty,  where  his  or 
his  friend's  error  is  to  be  amended  by  the  later  council ;  and 
in  holy  humility,  in  catholic  peace,  in  Christian  charity,  no 
question  that  a  schism  be  not  made  to  tear  the  church  (as 
here  the  Donatist's  did)  while  one  council  goes  to  reform  the 
lapse  of  another,  if  any  be.  Now  to  what  end  should  this 

u  Reprehend!.  y  Cedere. 

x  Si  quid  in  iis  forte  a  veritate  de-         z  Quum  cognoscitur  quod  latebat. 
viatum  est. 

204  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  learned  Father  be  so  zealous  in  this  work,  this  highest  work 
that  I  know  in  the  church,  reviewing  and  surveying  general 
councils,  to  keep  off  pride  and  arrogance  and  envy,  and  to 
keep  all  in  humility,  peace,  and  charity,  if  after  all  this 
noise  he  thought  later  councils  might  do  nothing  but  amend, 
that  is,  explain  the  former  ? 

VI. — That  shift  which  aBellarmine  adds  to  these  two  of 
Stapleton  is  poorest  of  all,  namely,  that  St.  Augustine  speaks 
of  unlawful  councils ;  and  it  is  no  question  but  they  may  be 
amended,  as  the  second  Ephesine  was  at  Chalcedon  :  for  this 
answer  hath  no  foundation  but  a  peradventure ;  nor  durst 
Bellarmine  rest  upon  it.  And  most  manifest  it  is  that  St. 
Augustine  speaks  of  councils  in  general,  that  they  may  err, 
and  be  amended  in  doctrine  of  faith ;  and  in  case  they  be 
not  amended,  that  then  they  be  condemned  and  rejected  by 
the  church,  as  this  of  Ephesus  and  divers  others  were.  And 
as  for  that  mere  trick  of  the  b  pope's  instruction,  approbation, 
or  confirmation,  to  preserve  it  from  error,  or  ratify  it  that 
it  hath  not  erred,  the  most  ancient  church  knew  it  not.  He 
had  his  suffrage  as  other  great  patriarchs  had,  and  his  vote 
was  highly  esteemed,  not  only  for  his  place,  but  for  worth 
too,  as  popes  were  then.  But  that  the  whole  council  de- 
pended upon  him  and  his  confirmation,  was  then  unknown, 
and  I  verily  think,  at  this  day  not  believed  by  the  wise  and 
learned  of  his  adherents. 

Consid.  5.  I. — Fifthly,  it  must  be  considered,  if  a  general  council  may 
err,  who  shall  judge  it  2  St.  Augustine  is  at  cpriora  a  pos- 
ter ioribus,  nothing  sure  that  is  less  than  a  d general  council. 
Why,  but  this  yet  lays  all  open  to  uncertainties,  and  makes 
way  for  a  whirlwind  of  a  private  spirit  to  ruffle  the  church. 
No,  neither  of  these :  first,  all  is  not  open  to  uncertainties ; 
for  general  councils  lawfully  called  and  ordered,  and  lawfully 
proceeding,  are  a  great  and  an  awful  representation,  and 
cannot  err  in  matters  of  faith ;  keeping  themselves  to  God's 
rule,  and  not  attempting  to  make  a  new  of  their  own; 
and  are  with  all  submission  to  be  observed  by  every  Chris- 
tian, where  scripture  or  evident  demonstration  come  not 
against  them.  Nor  doth  it  make  way  for  the  whirlwind  of  a 

a  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  7.  §.         b  Sect.  26.  num.  I. 
Respondeo  primo  forte.  c  Ibid.  d  Sect.  32.  num.  V. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  205 

private  spirit ;  for  private  spirits  are  too  giddy  to  rest  upon  Sect.  33. 
scripture,  and  too  heady  and  shallow  to  be  acquainted  with 
demonstrative  arguments.  And  it  were  happy  for  the  church, 
if  she  might  never  be  troubled  with  private  spirit  still  they 
brought  such  arguments.  I  know  this  is  hotly  objected 
against  e  Hooker ;  the  f  author  calls  him  a  "  Swise  protestant," 
yet  turns  thus  upon  him :  "  If  a  council  must  yield  to  a  de- 
monstrative proof,  who  shall  judge  whether  the  argument 
that  is  brought  be  a  demonstration  or  not  T  For  every  man 
that  will  kick  against  the  church  will  say,  the  scripture  he 
urges  is  evident,  and  his  reason  a  demonstration.  And  what 
is  this,  but  to  leave  all  to  the  wildness  of  a  private  spirit  2  Can 
any  ingenuous  man  read  this  passage  in  Hooker,  and  dream 
of  a  private  spirit  2  For  to  the  question,  Who  shall  judge  2 
Hooker  answers,  as  if  it  had  been  then  made;  "  hAn  argu- 
ment necessary  and  demonstrative  is  such,"  saith  he,  "  as 
being  proposed  to  any  man  and  understood,  the  mind  cannot 
choose  but  inwardly  assent  unto  it."  So  it  is  not  enough 
to  think  or  say  it  is  demonstrative.  The  light  then  of  a 
demonstrative  argument  is  the  evidence  which  itself  hath 
in  itself  to  all  that  understand  it.  Well;  but  because  all 
understand  it  not,  if  a  quarrel  be  made  who  shall  decide  it  2 
No  question  'but  a  general  council,  not  a  private  spirit :  first, 
in  the  intent  of  the  author ;  for  Hooker  in  all  that  discourse 
makes  the  sentence  of  the  council  k binding;  and  therefore 
that  is  made  judge,  not  a  private  spirit.  And  then  for  the 
judge  of  the  argument  it  is  as  plain ;  for  if  it  be  evident  to 
any  man,  then  to  so  many  learned  men  as  are  in  a  council 
doubtless  :  and  if  they  cannot  but  assent,  it  is  hard  to  think 
them  so  impious  that  they  will  define  against  it;  and  if 
that  which  is  thought  evident  to  any  man  be  not  evident 
to  such  a  grave  assembly,  it  is  probable  it  is  no  demon- 
stration, and  the  producers  of  it  ought  to  rest,  and  not  to 
trouble  the  church. 

II. — Nor  is  this  Hookers  alone,  nor  is  it  newly  thought  on 
by  us ;  it  is  a  ground  in  nature  which  grace  doth  ever  set 

e  Praefat.  p.  29.  of  a  pretext  of  seeming  evident  scrip- 

f  Dial,  dictus,  Deus  et  Rex.  ture  or  demonstration,  as  he  doth,  p.  59. 
e  Cordatus  protestans.  i  Sect.  32.  num.  II. 

h  Praefat.  p.  29.  And  therefore  A.  C.         k  Prsefat.  p.  28. 
is  much  to  blame  after  all  this,  to  talk 

206  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  right,  never  undermine.  And  !St.  Augustine  hath  it  twice  in 
one  chapter,  "  That  St.  Cyprian  and  that  council  at  Carthage 
would  have  presently  yielded  to  any  one  that  would  m  de- 
monstrate truth."  Nay,  it  is  a  rule  with  n  him,  "  Consent  of 
nations,  authority  confirmed  by  miracles  and  antiquity,  St. 
Peter's  chair  and  succession  from  it,  motives  to  keep  him  in 
the  catholic  church,  must  not  hold  him  against  demonstra- 
tion of  truth;  ° which  if  it  be  so  clearly  demonstrated  that 
it  cannot  come  into  doubt,  it  is  to  be  preferred  before  all 
those  things  by  which  a  man  is  held  in  the  catholic  church. " 
Therefore  an  evident  scripture  or  demonstration  of  truth 
must  take  place  every  where ;  but  where  these  cannot  be  had, 
there  must  be  submission  to  authority. 

III. — And  doth  not  Bellarmine  himself  grant  this?  for, 
speaking  of  councils,  he  delivers  this  proposition,  "  That  in- 
feriors may  not  judge  whether  their  superiors  (and  that  in  a 
council)  do  proceed  lawfully  or  not."  But  then  having  be- 
thought himself,  that  inferiors  at  all  times  and  in  all  causes 
are  not  to  be  cast  off,  he  adds  this  exception,  "  P  unless  it 
manifestly  appear  that  an  intolerable  error  be  committed." 
So  then,  if  such  an  error  be,  and  be  manifest,  inferiors  may 
do  their  duty,  and  a  council  must  yield ;  unless  you  will 
accuse  Bellarmine  too  of  leaning  to  a  private  spirit:  for 
neither  doth  he  express  who  shall  judge,  whether  the  error 
be  intolerable. 

IV. — This  will  not  down  with  you  ;  but  the  definition  of  a 
general  council  is  and  must  be  infallible.  Your  fellows  tell 
us,  (and  you  can  affirm  no  more,)  "  That  the  voice  of  the 
church  determining  in  council  is  not  q  human,  but  divine." 
That  is  well ;  divine,  then  sure  infallible :  yea,  but  the  pro- 
position sticks  in  the  throat  of  them  that  would  utter  it.  It 
is  not  divine  simply,  but  in  a  r manner  divine.  Why  but  then 
sure  not  infallible,  because  it  may  speak  loudest  in  that  man- 

1  De  Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  2.  c.  4.  constet     intolerabilem     errorem    coui- 

m  Uni  verumdicenti  et  demonstranti.  mitti. 

n  Cont.  Fund.  cap.  4.  q  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q.  3.  A.  I, 

°  Quse  quidem  si  tarn  manifesta  mon-  r  Divina  suo  modo.  Ibid.  And  so 

stratur,  ut  in  dubium  venire  non  possit,  A.  C.  too ;  who  hath  opened  his  month 

praeponenda  est  omnibus  illis  rebus,  qui-  very  wide,  to  prove  the  succession  of 

bus  in  catholica  teneor :  ita  si  aliquid  pastors  in  the  church  to  be  of  divine 

apertissimum  in  evangelic.  Ibid. cap. 4.  and  infallible  authority;  yet  in  the 

P  De  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  8.  §.  Alii  di-  close  is  forced  to  add,  "  at  least,  in 

cunt  concilium.  Nisi  manifestissime  some  sort."  p.  51. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  207 

ner  in  which  it  is  not  divine.  Nay,  more :  "  The  church  (for-  Sect.  33. 
sooth)  is  an  infallible  foundation  of  faith  sin  an  higher  kind 
than  the  scripture :  for  the  scripture  is  but  a  foundation  in 
testimony,  and  matter  to  be  believed ;  but  the  church  as  the 
efficient  cause  of  faith,  and,  in  some  sort,  the  very  formal." 
Is  not  this  blasphemy  ?  Doth  not  this  knock  against  all  evi- 
dence of  truth,  and  his  own  grounds  that  says  it  ?  Against  all 
evidence  of  truth ;  for  in  all  ages,  all  men  that  once  admitted 
the  scripture  to  be  the  word  of  God  (as  all  Christians  do),  do 
with  the  same  breath  grant  it  most  undoubted  and  infallible. 
But  all  men  have  not  so  judged  of  the  church's  definitions, 
though  they  have  in  greatest  obedience  submitted  to  them.  And 
against  his  own  grounds  that  says  it :  for  the  scripture  is  ab- 
solutely and  every  way  divine  ;  the  church's  definition  is  but 
suo  tnodo,  in  a  sort  or  manner,  divine.  But  that  which  is  but 
in  a  sort  can  never  be  a  foundation  in  an  higher  degree  than 
that  which  is  absolute,  and  every  way  such  :  therefore  neither 
can  the  definition  of  the  church  be  so  infallible  as  the  scrip- 
ture ;  much  less  in  altiori  genere,  in  a  higher  kind  than  the 
scripture.  But  because  when  all  other  things  fail  you  fly  to 
this,  that  the  church's  definition  in  a  general  council  is  by 
inspiration,  and  so  divine  and  infallible,  my  haste  shall  not 
carry  me  from  a  little  consideration  of  that  too. 

I. — Sixthly  then,  if  the  definition  of  a  general  council  be  Consid.  6. 
infallible,  then  the  infallibility  of  it  is  either  in  the  conclu- 
sion and  in  the  means  that  prove  it ;  or  in  the  conclusion,  not 
the  means ;  or  in  the  means,  not  the  conclusion.  But  it  is 
infallible  in  none  of  these.  Not  in  the  first,  the  conclusion 
and  the  means  :  for  there  are  divers  deliberations  in.  general 
councils,  where  the  conclusion  is  catholic ;  but  the  means  by 
which  they  prove  it  not  infallible.  Not  the  second,  the  con- 
clusion and  not  the  means :  for  the  conclusion  must  follow 
the  nature  of  the  premises  or  principles  out  of  which  it  is  de- 
duced ;  therefore,  if  those  which  the  council  uses  be  some- 
times uncertain,  as  is  proved  before,  the  conclusion  cannot  be 
infallible.  Not  in  the  third  the  means  and  not  the  conclu- 
sion :  for  that  cannot  but  be  true  and  necessary,  if  the  means 
be  so.  And  this  I  am  sure  you  will  never  grant ;  because  if 

s   In  altiori   genere,  viz.    in  genere     parte  formalis.    Ibid.  q.  4.  A.  3. 
rausae  efficientis,  atque  adeo  aliqua  ex 

208  ArcMwlwp  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  you  should,  you  must  deny  the  infallibility  which  you  seek  to 

II. — To  this  (for  I  confess  the  argument  is  old,  but  can 
never  be  worn  out  nor  shifted  off)  your  great  master  *Sta- 
pleton  (who  is  miserably  hampered  in  it,  and  indeed,  so  are 
you  all)  answers,  "  That  the  infallibility  of  a  council  is  in  the 
second  course;  that  is,  uit  is  infallible  in  the  conclusion, 
though  it  be  uncertain  and  fallible  in  the  means  and  proof  of 
it."  How  comes  this  to  pass  2  It  is  a  thing  altogether  un- 
known in  nature  and  art  too,  that  fallible  principles  can 
either  father  or  mother,  beget  or  bring  forth,  an  infallible 

III. — Well,  that  is  granted  in  nature  and  in  all  argumen- 
tation that  causes  knowledge.  But  we  shall  have  reasons  for 
it,  x  first,  because  the  church  is  discursive,  and  uses  the 
weights  and  moments  of  reason  in  the  means  ;  but  is  prophe- 
tical, and  depends  upon  immediate  revelation  from  the  Spirit 
of  God  in  delivering  the  conclusion.  It  is  but  the  making  of 
this  appear,  and  all  controversy  is  at  an  end.  Well,  I  will 
not  discourse  here  to  what  end  there  is  any  use  of  means  if 
the  conclusion  be  prophetical,  which  yet  is  justly  urged  ;  for 
no  good  cause  can  be  assigned  of  it.  If  it  be  prophetical  in 
the  conclusion,  (I  speak  still  of  the  present  church ;  for  that 
which  included  the  apostles,  which  had  the  spirit  of  prophecy 
and  immediate  revelation,  was  ever  prophetic  in  the  defini- 
tion ;  but  then  that  was  infallible  in  the  means  too,)  then 
since  it  delivers  the  conclusion  not  according  to  nature  and 
art,  that  is,  out  of  principles  which  can  bear  it,  there  must 
be  some  supernatural  authority  which  must  deliver  this  truth ; 
that  (say  I)  must  be  the  scripture.  For  if  you  fly  to  imme- 
diate revelation  now,  the  enthusiasm  must  be  yours.  But  the 
scriptures,  which  are  brought  in  the  very  exposition  of  all  the 
primitive  church,  neither  say  it,  nor  enforce  it.  Therefore 
scripture  warrants  not  your  prophecy  in  the  conclusion :  and 
I  know  no  other  thing  that  can  warrant  it.  If  you  think  the 
tradition  of  the  church  can  make  the  world  beholden  to  you. 

t  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q.  2.  ad  A.  n.  and  examine  the  means.     And  there- 

u  And  herein  I  must  needs  commend  fore  you  do  most  advisedly  make  them 

your  wisdom :  for  you  have  had  many  infallible  in  the  conclusion  without  the 

popes  so  ignorant,  grossly  ignorant,  as  means.  §.  39.  num.  VIII. 

that  they  have  been  no  way  able  to  sift  x  Ibid.  not.  4. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  209 

produce  any  Father  of  the  church  that  says  this  is  an  univer-  Sect.  33. 
sal  tradition  of  the  church,  that  her  definitions  in  a  general 
council  are  prophetical,  and  by  immediate  revelation ;  pro- 
duce any  one  Father  that  says  it  of  his  own  authority,  that  he 
thinks  so ;  nay,  make  it  appear  that  ever  any  prophet,  in 
that  which  he  delivered  from  God  as  infallible  truth,  was 
ever  discursive  at  all  in  the  means ;  nay,  make  it  but  pro- 
bable in  the  ordinary  course  of  prophecy,  (and  I  hope  you  go 
no  higher,  nor  will  I  offer  at  God's  absolute  power,)  that  that 
which  is  discursive  in  the  means  can  be  prophetic  in  the  con- 
clusion, and  you  shall  be  my  great  Apollo  for  ever.  In  the 
mean  time  I  have  learnt  this  from  y  yours,  "  That  all  pro- 
phecy is  by  vision,  inspiration,"  &c.,  and  that  no  vision  ad- 
mits discourse  ;  that  all  prophecy  is  an  illumination,  not  al- 
ways present,  but  when  the  word  of  the  z  Lord  came  to  them ; 
and  that  was  not  by  discourse.  And  yet  you  asay  again, 
"  That  this  prophetic  infallibility  of  the  church  is  not  gotten 
without  study  and  industry."  You  should  do  well  to  tell  us 
too,  why  God  would  put  his  church  to  study  for  the  spirit  of 
prophecy,  which  never  any  particular  prophet  was  put  unto  ; 
band  whosoever  shall  study  for  it  shall  do  it  in  vain,  since 
prophecy  is  a  cgift,  and  can  never  be  an  acquired  habit. 
And  there  is  somewhat  in  it,  that  Bellarmine,  in  all  his  dis- 
pute for  the  authority  of  general  councils,  dares  not  come  at 
this  rock.  (1He  prefers  the  conclusion  and  the  canon  before 
the  acts  and  the  deliberations  of  councils,  and  so  do  we  ;  but 
I  do  not  remember  that  ever  he  speaks  out,  that  the  con- 
clusion is  delivered  by  prophecy  or  revelation.  Sure  he 
sounded  the  shore,  and  found  danger  here.  He  did  sound  it; 
for  a  little  before  he  speaks  plainly,  (would  his  bad  cause  let 
him  be  constant,)  "  e  Councils  do  deduce  their  conclusions." 
What !  from  inspiration  ?  "  No,  but  out  of  the  word  of 

y  Prophetae  audiebant  a  Deo  interius  Averrorem,  &c.  Fran.  Picus,  2.  Praenot. 

inspirante.   Thorn.  2.  2ae.  q.  5.  A.  t.  c.  4. 

ad  3.  c  i  Cor.  xii.  10. 

z   The  word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  d  De  Coiicil.  lib.  ii.  c.  12. 

me,  is  common  in  the  Prophets.  e  Concilia  non  habent,  neque  scribunt 

a  Stapl.  Relect.  cont.  4.  q.  2.  p.  473.  immediatas    revelationes,  &c.    sed   ex 

b    Propheticam    revelationem    nullo  verbo  Dei  per  ratiocinatkmem  deducunt 

pacto  haberi  posse,  vel  ope  naturae,  vel  conclusiones.   Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii. 

studio,   contra  Avicennarn  Algazalerri,  cap.  12.  §.  Dicuntur. 


210  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  God  ;  and  that  per  ratiocinationem,  by  argumentation  :"  nei- 
ther have  they  nor  do  they  write  any  immediate  revelations. 

IV. The  second  reason  why  kgtapleton  will  have  it  pro- 
phetic in  the  conclusion  is,  "  Because  that  which  is  deter- 
mined by  the  church  is  matter  of  faith,  not  of  knowledge  ;  and 
that  therefore,  the  church  proposing  it  to  be  believed,  though  it 
use  means,  yet  it  stands  not  upon  art,  or  means,  or  argument, 
but  the  revelation  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  else,  when  we  embrace 
the  conclusion  proposed,  it  should  not  be  an  assent  of  faith, 
but  an  habit  of  knowledge.11  This  for  the  first  part — That  the 
church  uses  the  means,  but  follows  them  not — is  all  one  in  sub- 
stance with  the  former  reason  :  and  for  the  latter  part — That 
then  our  admitting  the  decree  of  a  council  would  be  no  assent 
of  faith,  but  an  habit 'of  knowledge — what  great  inconve- 
nience is  there  if  it  be  granted  ?  For  I  think  it  is  undoubted 
truth,  that  one  and  the  same  conclusion  may  be  faith  to  the 
believer  that  cannot  prove,  and  knowledge  to  the  learned 
that  can.  And  sSt.  Augustine  I  am  sure,  in  regard  of  one 
and  the  same  thing,  even  this,  the  very  wisdom  of  the  church 
in  her  doctrines,  ascribes  understanding  to  one  sort  of  men, 
and  belief  to  another  weaker  sort ;  and  h  Thomas  goes  with 

V. — Now  for  further  satisfaction,  if  not  of  you,  yet  of 
others,  this  may  well  be  thought  on  ;  Man  lost  by  sin  the 
integrity  of  his  nature,  and  cannot  have  light  enough  to  see 
the  way  to  heaven  but  by  grace.  This  grace  was  first  me- 
rited, after  given  by  Christ:  this  grace  is  first  kindled  by 
faith ;  by  which,  if  we  agree  not  to  some  supernatural  prin- 
ciples which  no  reason  can  demonstrate  simply,  we  can  never 
see  our  way.  But  this  light,  when  it  hath  made  reason  sub- 
mit itself,  clears  the  eye  of  reason  ;  it  never  puts  it  out.  In 
which  sense,  it  may  be,  is  that  of  'Optatus,  "  That  the  very 
catholic  church  itself  is  reasonable,  as  well  as  diffused  every 
where."  By  which  k  reason  enlightened  (which  is  stronger 

fStapl.  ibid.  374.  ut   credibile,  qui  demonstrationem  non 

'  Cont.  Fund.  c.  4.  capit- 

h  Thorn,  p.  i.  q.  2.  A.  2.  ad  i.    Nihil  i  Rationabilis  et  ubique  diffnsa.  lib. 

prohibet  illud,  qnod  secundum  se  demon-  iii. 

strabile  est,  et  scibile,  ab  aliquo  accipi  k  Ut  ipsa  fide  valentiores  facti,  quod 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

than  reason)  the  church  in  all  ages  hath  been  able  either  to  Sect.  33. 
convert,  or  convince,  or  at  least  1  stop  the  mouths  of  philo- 
sophers, and  the  great  men  of  reason,  in  the  very  point  of 
faith  where  it  is  at  highest.  To  the  present  occasion  then. 
The  first,  immediate,  fundamental  points  of  faith,  without 
which  there  is  no  salvation,  as  they  cannot  be  proved  by 
reason,  so  neither  need  they  be  determined  by  any  council, 
nor  ever  were  they  attempted,  they  are  so  plain  set  down  in 
the  scripture.  If  about  the  sense  and  true  meaning  of  these, 
or  necessary  deduction  out  of  these  prime  articles  of  faith,  ge- 
neral councils  determine  any  thing,  as  they  have  done  in  Nice 
and  the  rest,  there  is  no  inconvenience,  that  one  and  the 
same  canon  of  the  council  should  be  believed,  as  it  reflects 
upon  the  articles  and  grounds  indemonstrable ;  and  m  yet 
known  to  the  learned  by  the  means  and  proof  by  which  that 
deduction  is  vouched  and  made  good.  And  again  ;  the  con- 
clusion of  a  council,  suppose  that  in  Nice,  about  the  consub- 
stantiality  of  Christ  with  the  Father,  in  itself  considered,  is 
indemonstrable  by  reason ;  there  I  believe  and  assent  in  faith : 
but  the  same  conclusion,  n  if  you  give  me  the  ground  of  scripture 
and  the  Creed,  (and  somewhat  must  be  supposed  in  all,  whether 
faith  or  knowledge,)  is  demonstrable  by  natural  reason  against 
any  Arian  in  the  world  :  and  if  it  be  demonstrable,  I  may 
know  it,  and  have  an  habit  of  it.  And  what  inconvenience  in 
this  ?  for  the  weaker  sort  of  Christians,  which  cannot  de- 
duce when  they  have  the  principle  granted,  they  are  to  rest 
upon  the  definition  only,  and  their  assent  is  mere  faith :  yea, 
and  the  learned  too,  where  there  is  not  a  demonstration  evi- 
dent to  them,  assent  by  faith  only,  and  not  by  knowledge. 
And  what  inconvenience  in  this  ?  Nay,  the  necessity  of  nature 
is  such,  that  these  principles  once  given,  the  understanding  of 
man  cannot  rest,  but  it  must  be  thus.  And  the  ° apostle 
would  never  have  required  a  man  to  be  able  to  give  a  reason 

credimus    intelligere     mereamur,    non  2.  233.  q.  i.  A.  5.  C.    Id  quod  est  sci- 

jam    homiriibus    sed    Deo    intrinsecus  turn  ab  uno  homine  etiarn  in  statu  viie, 

mentem    nostram   firmante   et   illumi-  est  ab  alio  creditum,   qui   hoc  demori- 

nante.    S.  August-  cont.  Epist.  Funda-  strare  non  novit. 

ment.  cap.  14.  n  Concilium  Nicaenum  deduxit  con- 

1  Omnia  genera  ingeniorum   subdita  clusionem   ex  scripturis.      Bellarm.  de 

scripturae.     S.  August,  cont.  Faust,  lib.  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  12.  §.  Sic  etiani. 

xxii.  cap.  96.  o  i  Pet.  iii.  15. 

m  Almain.  3.  D.  24.  q.  i.  et  Thorn. 

P  2 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  and  an  account  of  the  hope  that  is  in  him,  if  he  might  not  be 
able  to  know  his  account,  or  have  lawful  interest  to  give  it 
when  he  knew  it,  without  prejudicing  his  faith  by  his  know- 
ledge. And  suppose  exact  knowledge  and  mere  belief  cannot 
stand  together  in  the  same  person,  in  regard  of  the  same 
thing,  by  the  same  means,  yet  that  doth  not  make  void  this 
truth.  For  where  is  that  exact  knowledge,  or  in  whom,  that 
must  not  merely  in  points  of  faith  believe  the  article  or 
ground  upon  which  they  rest?  but  when  that  is  once  be- 
lieved, it  can  demonstrate  many  things  from  it.  And  defini- 
tions of  councils  are  not  principia  Jidei,  principles  of  faith,  but 
deductions  from  them. 

Consid  7.  I- — And  now,  because  you  ask,  "  Wherein  are  we  nearer 
to  unity  by  a  council,  if  a  council  may  err?"  besides  the 
answer  given,  I  promised  to  consider  which  opinion  was  most 
agreeable  with  the  church,  which  most  able  to  preserve  or 
reduce  Christian  peace ;  the  Roman,  that  a  council  cannot 
err,  or  the  protestants1,  that  it  can.  And  this  I  propose 
not  as  a  rule,  but  leave  the  Christian  world  to  consider  of  it, 
as  I  do. 

II. — First  then  I  consider,  whether  in  those  places  of 
scripture  before  mentioned,  or  any  other,  there  be  promised 
to  the  present  church  an  absolute  infallibility ;  or  whether 
such  an  infallibility  will  not  serve  the  turn,  as  PStapleton, 
after  much  wriggling,  is  forced  to  acknowledge ;  "  One  not 
every  way  exact :  because  it  is  enough  if  the  church  do 
diligently  insist  upon  that  which  was  once  received ;  and 
there  is  not  need  of  so  great  certainty  to  open  and  explicate 
that  which  lies  hid  in  the  seed  of  faith  sown,  and  deduce 
from  it,  as  to  seek  out  and  teach  that  which  was  altogether 
unknown."  And  if  this  be  so,  then  sure  the  church  of  the 
apostles  required  guidance  by  a  greater  degree  of  infallibility 
than  the  present  church ;  which  yet.  if  it  follow  the  scrip- 
ture, is  infallible  enough,  though  it  hath  not  the  same  degree 
of  certainty  which  the  apostles  had  and  the  scripture  hath. 
Nor  can  I  tell  what  to  make  of  Bellarmine,  who  in  a  whole 
chapter  disputes  five  prerogatives  in  certainty  of  truth  qthat 

P  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q.  2.  Notab.  3.  q  De  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  12.  §.  ult. 
Exacta  et  omnimoda  infallibilitate  non  Cum  utraque  sint  infallibilis  veritatis, 
indiget,  sed  satis  est  semel  acceptis,  &c«  aeqtie  certa  dici  possunt. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  213 

the  scripture  hath  above  a  council  ;  and  at  last  concludes,  Sect.  33. 
"  That  they  may  be  said  to  be  equally  certain  in  infallible 

III.  —  The  next  thing  I  consider  is,  Suppose  this  not  exact, 
but  congruous  infallibility  in  the  church  ;  is  it  not  residing 
according  to  power  and  right  of  authority  in  the  whole 
church,  (always  understanding  the  church  in  this  place  pro 
communitate  prcelatorum,  for  church  governors  which  have 
votes  in  councils,)  and  in  a  general  council,  only  by  power 
deputed  r  with  mandate  to  determine  2  The  places  of  scrip- 
ture with  expositions  of  the  Fathers  upon  them,  make  me 
apt  to  believe  this.  "  St.  Peter,"  saith  sSt.  Augustine,  u  did 
not  receive  the  keys  of  the  church,  but  as  sustaining  the 
person  of  the  church."  Now  for  this  particular,  suppose  the 
key  of  doctrine  be  to  let  in  truth  and  shut  out  error,  and 
suppose  the  key  rightly  used  infallible  in  this  ;  yet  this  in- 
fallibility is  primely  in  the  church  docent,  in  whose  person 
(not  strictly  in  his  own)  St.  Peter  received  the  keys.  But 
here  Stapleton  lays  across  my  way  again,  and  would  thrust 
me  out  of  this  consideration.  He  l  grants  that  St.  Peter 
received  these  keys  indeed,  and  in  the  person  of  the  church  ; 
but  (saith  he)  that  was  because  he  was  primate  of  the  church  : 
and  therefore  the  church  received  the  keys  finally,  but  St. 
Peter  formally  ;  that  is  (if  I  mistake  him  not)  St.  Peter  for 
himself  and  his  successors  received  the  keys  in  his  own  right  ; 
but  to  this  end,  to  benefit  the  church  of  which  he  was  made 
pastor.  But  I  keep  in  my  consideration  still  ;  for  the  church 
here  is  taken  pro  communitate  prcelatorum,  for  all  the  pre- 
lates, that  is,  for  the  church  as  it  is  docent  and  regent,  as 
it  teaches  and  governs  :  for  so  only  it  relates  to  a  general 
council  ;  and  so  uSt.  Augustine  and  Stapleton  himself  under- 
stand it  in  the  places  before  alleged.  Now  in  this  sense 
St.  Peter  received  the  keys  formally  for  himself  and  his  suc- 

r  Quod   si  ecclesiae  universitati  non  bat  ecclesiae,  ideoque  etsi  finaliter  eccle- 

est  data  ulla  authoritas  ;  ergo  nee  con-  sia    accepit,    tamen    formaliter    Petrus 

cilio   general!  quatenus   ecclesiam  uni-  accepit.     Relect.  Cont.  6.  q.  3.  A.  5. 
versalem  repraesentat.    Bellarm.  de  Con-         u  Ad  omnes  dicitur,  Pasce  oves,  &c. 

cil.  lib.  ii.  c.  16.  §.  Ex  his  habemus.  S.  August,    de   Agon.    Christ,    c.    30. 

s  Petrus  personam  ecclesiae  catholicae  Which  cannot  be  spoken  or  meant  of 

sustinet,  et  huic  datte  sum  claves,  quum  the  laity.     Et  Bilson.  Perpet.  Govern. 

Petro  datae.     De  Agon.  Christ,  c.  30.  c.  8.  fine. 

t  Sed  propter  primatum  quern  gere- 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  cessors  at  Rome,  but  not  for  them  only ;  but  as  he  received 
them  in  the  person  of  the  whole  church  docent,  so  he  re- 
ceived them  also  in  their  right  as  well  as  his  own,  and  for 
them  all.  And  in  this  sense  St.  Peter  received  the  keys  in 
the  person  of  the  church  (by  Stapleton's  good  leave)  both 
finally  and  formally.  For  I  would  have  it  considered  also, 
whether  it  be  ever  read  in  any  classic  author,  that  to  receive 
a  thing  in  the  person  of  another,  or  sustaining  the  person  of 
another,  is  only  meant,  finally  to  receive  it ;  that  is,  to  his 
good,  and  not  in  his  right.  I  should  think,  he  that  receives 
any  thing  in  the  person  of  another,  receives  it  indeed  to  his 
good,  and  to  his  use,  but  in  his  right  too ;  and  that  the 
formal  right  is  not  in  the  receiver  only,  but  in  him  or  them 
also  whose  person  he  sustains  while  he  receives  it.  I  will 
take  one  of  xStapleton's  own  instances.  A  consul  or  prime 
senator  in  an  aristocratical  government  (such  as  the  churches 
is  ministerially  under  Christ)  receives  a  privilege  from  the 
senate ;  and  he  receives  it  as  primarily  and  as  formally  for 
them  as  for  himself,  and  in  the  senate's  right  as  well  as  his 
own,  he  being  but  a  chief  part,  and  they  the  whole.  And 
this  is  St.  Peter's  case  in  relation  to  the  whole  church  docent 
and  regent,  saving  that  his  place  and  power  was  perpetual, 
and  not  annual,  as  the  consul's  was.  This  stumblingblock 
then  is  nothing ;  and,  in  my  consideration,  it  stands  still, 
that  the  church,  in  this  notion,  by  the  hands  of  St.  Peter, 
received  the  keys,  and  all  power  signified  by  them;  and 
transmitted  them  to  their  successors,  who,  by  the  assistance 
of  God's  Spirit,  may  be  able  to  use  them,  but  still  in  and  by 
the  same  hands ;  and  perhaps,  to  open  and  shut  in  some 
things  infallibly,  when  the  pope  and  a  general  council  too 
(forgetting  both  her  and  her  rule,  the  scripture)  are  to  seek 
how  to  turn  these  keys  in  their  wards. 

IV. — The  third  particular  I  consider  is,  Suppose  in  the 
whole  catholic  church  militant  an  absolute  infallibility  in  the 
prime  foundations  of  faith,  absolutely  necessary  to  salvation  ; 
and  that  this  power  of  not  erring  so  is  not  y  communicable 

x  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  3.  q.  i.  A.  i.  concurrente    universal!    totius   ecclesiae 

a^  2-  consensu,  implicite,  vel  explicite,  vere, 

y  Non  omnia  ilia  quae  tradit  ecclesia  vel  interpretative.     Gerson.  Tract,  de 

sub  definitione  judicial!  (i.  e.  in  con-  Declaration  Veritatum  quae  credendae 

cilio)  sunt   de   necessitate   salutis   ere-  sunt,  &c.  §.  4.  par.  i.  pag.  414. 
dendu,  sed  ilia  duntaxat  quae  sic  tradit 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  215 

to  a  general  council  which  represents  it,  but  that  the  council  Sect.  33. 
is  subject  to  error :  this  supposition  doth  not  only  preserve 
that  which  you  desire  in  the  church,  an  infallibility,  but  it 
meets2  with  all  inconveniences,  which  usually  have  done,  and 
daily  do  perplex  the  church.  And  here  is  still  a  remedy  for 
all  things  ;  for  if  private  respects,  if  a  bandies  in  a  faction,  if 
power  and  favour  of  some  parties,  if  weakness  of  them  which 
have  the  managing,  if  any  unfit  mixture  of  state  councils,  if 
any  departure  from  the  rule  of  the  word  of  God,  if  any  thing 
else  sway  and  wrench  the  council ;  the  whole  b  church  upon 
evidence  found  in  express  scripture,  or  demonstration  of  this 
miscarriage,  hath  power  to  represent  herself  in  another  body 
or  council,  and  to  take  order  for  what  was  amiss  either  prac- 
tised or  concluded.  So  here  is  a  means,  without  any  infring- 
ing any  lawful  authority  of  the  church,  to  preserve  or  reduce 
unity ;  and  yet  grant,  as  I  did,  and  as  the  c  church  of  England 
doth,  "  That  a  general  council  may  err."  And  this  course 
the  church  heretofore  took ;  for  she  did  call  and  represent 
herself  in  a  new  council,  and  define  against  the  heretical  con- 
clusions of  the  former ;  as  in  the  case  at  Ariminum  and  the 
second  of  Ephesus  is  evident,  and  in  other  councils  named 
by  dBellarmine.  Now  the  church  is  never  more  cunningly 
abused,  than  when  men  out  of  this  truth,  that  she  may  err, 
infer  this  falsehood,  that  she  is  not  to  be  obeyed.  For  it 
will  never  follow,  she  may  err.  therefore  she  may  not  govern. 
For  he  that  says,  Obey  them  which  have  the  rule  over  you,  and 
submit  yourselves,  for  they  watch  for  your  soulse,  commands 
obedience,  and  expressly  ascribes  rule  to  the  church.  And 
that  is  not  only  a  pastoral  power,  to  teach  and  direct,  but 
a  praetorian  also,  to  control  and  censure  too,  where  errors 
or  crimes  are  against  points  fundamental  or  of  great  con- 

z  Possit  tamen  contingere,  quod  quam-  Ocham.  Dial.  pag.  p.  lib.  iii.  cap.  13. 
vis  generale  concilium  definiret  aliquid  a  Many  of  these  were  potent  at  Ari- 
contra   fidem,  ecclesia  Dei   non  expo-  minum  and  Seleucia. 
neretur  periculo.     Quia  possit  contin-  b  Determinationibus  quae  a  concilio 
gere  quod  congregati  in  concilio  generali  vel  pontifice  summo  Hunt  super  iis  du- 
essent  pauci  et  viles  tarn  in  re,  quam  bitationibus,  quae  substantiam  fidei  con- 
in  hominum  reputatione,  respectu  illo-  cernunt,  necessario  credendum  est,  dum 
rum   qui   ad    illud   concilium   generale  universalis  ecclesia  non  reclamet.     Fr. 
minime  convenissent.     Et  tune  illorum  P.  Mirand.  Theor.  8. 
leviter  error  extirparetur  per  multitu-  c  Artie.  XXI. 

dinem  meliorum  et  sapientiorum  et  fa-  d  Bellarm.  de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  16.  §. 

mosiorum   illis.     Quibus   etiam  multi-  Tertio  concilium  sine  papa, 

tudo  simplicium  adhaereret  magis,  &c.  c  Heb.  xiii.  17. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  sequence :  else  St.  Paul  would  not  have  given  the  rule  for 
excommunication f;  nor  Christ  himself  have  put  the  man  that 
will  not  hear  and  obey  the  church  into  the  place  and  con- 
dition of  an  ethnic  and  a  publican,  as  he  doths  :  and  Solomon's 
rule  is  general,  and  he  hath  it  twice  :  My  son,  forsake  not  the 
teaching  or  instruction  of  thy  mother^.  Now  this  is  either 
spoken  and  meant  of  a  natural  mother,  and  her  authority 
over  her  children  is  confirmed,  Ecclus.  iii.  % ;  and  the  fool 
will  be  upon  him  that  despiseth  her,  Prov.  xv.  20  ;  or  it  is 
extended  also  to  our  mystical  and  spiritual  mother  the  church. 
And  so  the  Geneva  'note  upon  the  place  expresses  it.  And 
I  cannot  but  incline  to  this  opinion,  because  the  blessings 
which  accompany  this  obedience  are  so  many  and  great,  as 
that  they  are  not  like  to  be  the  fruits  of  obedience  to  a  natu- 
ral mother  only,  as  Solomon  expresses  them  allk  ;  and  in  all 
this  here  is  no  exception  of  the  mother's  erring.  For  mater 
errans,  an  erring  mother,  loses  neither  the  right  nor  the  power 
of  a  mother  by  her  error.  And  I  marvel  what  son  should 
shew  reverence  or  obedience,  if  no  mother  that  hath  erred 
might  exact  it.  It  is  true,  the  son  is  not  to  follow  his 
mother's  error,  or  his  mother  into  error.  But  it  is  true  too, 
it  is  a  grievous  crime  in  a  son  to  cast  off  all  obedience  to 
his  mother,  because  at  some  time,  or  in  some  things,  she 
hath  fallen  into  error.  And  howsoever  this  consideration 
meets  with  this  inconvenience  as  well  as  the  rest.  For  sup- 
pose (as  I  said)  in  the  whole  catholic  militant  church,  an 
absolute  infallibility  in  the  prime  foundations  of  faith  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  salvation;  and  then,  though  the  mother 
church,  provincial  or  national,  may  err,  yet  if  the  grand- 
mother, the  whole  universal  church,  cannot  in  these  necessary 
things,  all  remains  safe,  and  all  occasions  of  disobedience 
taken  from  the  possibility  of  the  church's  erring  are  quite 
taken  away.  Nor  is  this  mother  less  to  be  valued  by  her 
children,  because  in  some  smaller  things  age  had  filled  her 
face  fuller  of  wrinkles.  For  where  it  is  said,  that  ^Christ 
makes  to  himself  a  church  without  spot  or  wrinkle,  that  is  not 

f  i  Cor.  y.  5.          s  Matt,  xviii.  17.  wherein  the   faithful   are  begotten  by 

h  Prov.  i.  8.    Vide  S.  August.  Conf.  the  incorruptible  seed  of  God's  word". 

2.  c.  3.  and  Prov.  vi.  20.  Annot.  in  Prov.  i.  8. 

i  Forsake  not  thy  mother's   instruc-         k  Prov.  vi.  22.  1  Ephes.  v.  27. 

tion,  that  is,  the  teaching  of  the  church, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  217 

understood  of  the  church  militant,   but   of  the  church  tri-  Sect.  33. 
umphant.    m  And  to  maintain  the  contrary,  is  a  branch  of  the 
spreading  heresy  of  Pelagianism.     Nor  is  the  church  on  earth 
any  freer  from  wrinkles  in  doctrine  and  discipline,  than  she 
is  from  spots  in  life  and  conversation. 

V. — The  next  thing  I  consider  is,  Suppose  a  general  coun- 
cil take  itself  to  be  infallible  in  all  things  which  are  of  faith ; 
if  it  prove  not  so,  but  that  an  error  in  the  faith  be  con- 
cluded, the  same  erring  opinion  that  makes  it  think  itself 
infallible  makes  the  error  of  it  seem  irrevocable.  And  when 
truth  which  lay  hid  shall  be  brought  to  light,  the  church 
(who  was  lulled  asleep  by  the  opinion  of  infallibility)  is  left 
open  to  all  manner  of  distractions,  as  it  appears  at  this  day. 
And  that  a  council  may  err  (besides  all  other  instances, 
which  are  not  few)  appears  by  that  error  of  the  council  of 
Constance11.  And  one  instance  is  enough  to  overthrow  a 
general,  be  it  a  council.  °  Christ  instituted  the  sacrament 
of  his  body  and  blood  in  both  kinds.  To  break  Christ's 
institution  is  a  damnable  error,  and  so  confessed  by  P  Staple- 
ton.  The  council  is  bold,  and  defines  peremptorily,  that  "  to 
communicate  in  both  kinds  is  not  necessary,  with  a  non  ob- 
stante  to  the  institution  of  Christ.11  Consider  now  with  me, 
is  this  an  error  or  not  ?  q  Bellarmine  and  Stapleton,  and  you 
too,  say  it  is  not;  because  to  receive  under  both  kinds  is 
not  by  divine  right.  No  !  No  sure ;  for  it  was  not  Chrises 
precept/  but  his  example.  Why,  but  I  had  thought  Christ's 
institution  of  a  sacrament  had  been  more  than  his  example 
only,  and  as  binding  for  the  necessaries  of  a  sacrament,  the 
matter  and  form,  sas  a  precept ;  therefore  speak  out,  and 
deny  it  to  be  Christ's  institution,  or  else  grant  with  Staple- 
ton,  "  it  is  a  damnable  error  to  go  against  it."  If  you  can 

m  In  id  progrediuntur  (Pelagiaiii)  ut  Art.  2.  Untruth  49. 
dicant  vitam  justorum    in    hoc   secnlo         q  De  Eucharist.  4.  c.  26. 
nullum  omnino  habere  peccatum,  et  ex         r  Bellarm.   ibid.   §.  Vicesimo   profe- 

his  ecclesiani  Christi  in  hac  mortalitate  runt. 

perfici  ut   sit  omnino   sine  macula   et         s  And   now   lately,  in    a   catechism 

ruga.     Quasi  non  sit  Christi  ecclesia,  printed    at    Paris,    1637,   without   the 

quae  in  toto  terrarum  orbe  clamat  ad  author's  name,  it  is  twice  affirmed  thus  : 

Deum :  Dimitte  nobis  debita  nostra,  &c.  "  The   institution    of  a   sacrament   is 

S.  August.  1.  de  Hseresibus,  Haer.  88.  of  itself  a  command."     Conference  14. 

n  Sess.  13.  p.  244.     And  again,  p.  260,  "  Institu- 

o  Matt.  xxvi.     i  Cor.  xi.  23.  tion  is  a  precept." 

P  Return  of  Untruths  upon  Mr.  Jewel, 

218  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  prove  that  Christ's  institution  is  not  as  binding  to  us  as  a 
precept,  (which  you  shall  never  be  able,)  take  the  precept 
with  it,  t  Drink  ye  all  of  this  ;  which  though  you  shift  as  you 
can,  yet  you  can  never  make  it  other  than  it  is,  a  binding 
precept.  But  Bellarmine  hath  yet  one  better  device  than 
this  to  save  the  council.  He  saith,  it  is  a  mere  calumny,  and 
that  the  council  hath  no  such  thing,  "  that  the  non  obstante 
hath  no  reference  to  receiving  under  both  kinds,  but  to  the 
time  of  receiving  it,  after  supper  ;  in  which  the  council  saith, 
the  custom  of  the  church  is  to  be  observed,  non  obstante,  not- 
withstanding Christ's  example."  How  foul  Bellarmine  is  in 
this  must  appear  by  the  words  of  the  council,  which  are 
these  :  "  u  Though  Christ  instituted  this  venerable  sacrament, 
and  gave  it  his  disciples  after  supper  under  both  kinds  of 
bread  and  wine,  yet,  non  obstante^  notwithstanding  this,  it 
ought  not  to  be  consecrated  after  supper,  nor  received  but 
fasting.  And  likewise,  that  though  in  the  primitive  church 
this  sacrament  was  received  by  the  faithful  under  both  kinds, 
yet  this  custom,  that  it  should  be  received  by  laymen  only 
under  the  kind  of  bread,  is  to  be  held  for  a  law  which  may 
not  be  refused.  And  to  say  this  is  an  unlawful  custom  of 
receiving  under  one  kind,  is  erroneous  ;  and  they  which  per- 
sist in  saying  so  are  to  be  punished,  and  driven  out  as  here- 
tics." Now,  where  is  here  any  slander  of  the  council  ?  The 
words  are  plain,  and  the  non  obstante  must  necessarily  (for 
aught  I  can  yet  see)  be  referred  to  both  clauses  in  the  words 
following  ;  because  both  clauses  went  before  it,  and  hath  as 
much  force  against  receiving  under  both  kinds,  as  against 
receiving  after  supper.  Yea,  and  the  after-words  of  the  council 
couple  both  together  in  this  reference  ;  for  it  follows,  "Et  simi- 
liter,  and  so  likewise,  that  though  in  the  primitive  church," 
See.  And  a  man,  by  the  definition  of  this  council,  may  be 
an  heretic  for  standing  to  Christ's  institution  in  the  very 

t  Matt.  xxvi.  i  Cor.  xi.  —  MejuyrftueW  the  council  goes  on  :  Et  similiter  quod 

roivvv  TTJS  (rwrripiov  ravrrjs  fvroXijs.  in  licet  in  primitiva  ecclesia  sacramenta 

Liturg.  S.  Chrys.  reciperentur  sub  utraque  specie  a  ndeli- 

u  Licet  Christus  post  coenam  institue-  bus,  tamen  haec  consuetudo,  ut  a  laicis 

rit,  et  suis  discipulis  administraverit  sub  sub  specie  panis  tantum  suscipiatur, 

utraque  specie  panis  et  vini  hoc  vene-  habenda  est  pro  lege,  quam  non  licet 

rabile  sacramentum,  tamen  hoc  non  ob-  reprobare.  Et  asserere  hanc  esse  illi- 

stante,  non  debet  confici  post  coenam,  citam,  est  erroneum  :  et  pertinaciter 

nee  recipi  nisi  a  jejunis.  Here  Bellar-  asserentes  sunt  arcendi  tanquam  haere- 

mine  stays,  and  goes  no  further;  but  tici.  Sess.  15. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  219 

matter  of  the  sacrament ;  and  the  churches  law  for  one  kind  Sect.  33. 
may   not   be   refused,    but   Christfs    institution   under    both 
kinds  may.    And  yet  this  council  did  not  err  ;  no :  take  heed 
of  it. 

VI. — But  your  opinion  is  more  unreasonable  than  this  :  for 
consider  any  body  collective,  be  it  more  or  less  universal 
whensoever  it  assembles  itself;  did  it  ever  give  more  power 
to  the  representing  body  of  it,  than  binding  power  upon  all 
particulars  and  itself  ?  And  did  it  ever  give  this  power  other- 
wise than  with  this  reservation  in  nature,  that  it  would  call 
again  and  reform,  yea,  and  if  need  were,  abrogate  any  law 
or  ordinance  upon  just  cause  made  evident,  that  this  repre- 
senting body  had  failed  in  trust  or  truth?  And  this  power 
no  body  collective,  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  can  put  out  of  itself, 
or  give  away  to  a  parliament  or  council,  or  call  it  what  you 
will,  that  represents  it.  Nay,  in  my  consideration  it  holds 
strongest  in  the  church ;  for  a  council  hath  power  to  order, 
settle,  and  define  differences  arisen  concerning  faith.  This 
power  the  council  hath  not  by  any  immediate  institution 
from  Christ,  but  it  was  prudently  taken  up  in  the  church 
from  the  x  apostles1  example,  so  that  to  hold  councils  to 
this  end  is  apparent  apostolical  tradition  written ;  but  the 
power  which  councils  so  held  have,  is  from  the  whole  catholic 
church,  whose  members  they  are  ;  and  the  church's  power 
from  God.  And  ythis  power  the  church  cannot  further  give 
away  to  a  general  council,  than  that  the  decrees  of  it  shall 
bind  all  particulars  and  itself,  but  not  bind  the  whole  church 
from  calling  again;  and  in  the  after-calls,  upon  just  cause 
to  order,  yea,  and  if  need  be,  to  abrogate  former  acts.  I 
say,  upon  just  cause  :  for  if  the  council  be  lawfully  called, 
and  proceed  orderly,  and  conclude  according  to  the  rule,  the 
scripture,  the  whole  church  cannot  but  approve  the  council, 
and  then  the  definitions  of  it  are  binding ;  and  the  power 
of  the  church  hath  no  wrong  in  this,  so  long  as  no  power 
but  her  own  may  meddle,  or  offer  to  infringe  any  definition 

x  Act.    xv.     In    Novo    Testamento  q.  3.  A.  4.  ad  3. 

exemplum  celebrationis  conciliorum  ab  y  This   is  more  reasonable  a  great 

apostolis  habemns,  &c.     Joh.  de  Tur-  deal  than  that  of  Bellarmine,  de  Con- 

recremata,  Sura,  de  Eccles.  lib.  iii.  c.  2.  cil.  ii.  c.  18.     Pontificem  non  posse  se 

Et  firmitas  conciliorum  nititur  exemplo  subjicereseutentiaecoactivae  conciliorum. 
primi  concilii.     Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  6. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  of  hers  made  in  her  representative  body,  a  lawful  general 
council.  And  certain  it  is,  no  power  but  her  own  may  do  it. 
Nor  doth  this  open  any  gap  to  private  spirits :  for  all  deci- 
sions in  such  a  council  are  binding ;  and  because  the  whole 
church  can  meet  no  other  way,  the  council  shall  remain  the 
supreme,  external,  living,  temporary,  ecclesiastical  judge  of 
all  controversies.  Only  the  whole  church,  and  she  alone,  hath 
power,  when  scripture  or  demonstration  is  found  and  peace- 
ably tendered  to  her,  to  represent  herself  again  in  a  new 
council,  and  in  it  to  order  what  was  amiss. 

VII. — Nay,  your  opinion  is  yet  more  unreasonable ;  for 
you  do  not  only  make  the  definition  of  a  general  council,  but 
the  sentence  of  the  pope,  infallible ;  nay,  more  infallible  than 
it :  zfor  any  general  council  may  err  with  you,  if  the  pope 
confirm  it  not.  So  belike  this  infallibility  rests  not  in  the 
representative  body,  the  council,  nor  in  the  whole  body,  the 
church ;  but  in  your  head  of  the  church,  the  pope  of  Rome. 
Now  I  may  ask  you,  to  what  end  such  a  trouble  for  a  general 
council?  or  wherein  are  we  nearer  to  unity,  if  the  pope 
confirm  it  not  ?  You  answer,  (though  not  in  the  conference, 
yet  elsewhere,)  that  the  pope  errs  not,  especially  giving  sen- 
tence in  a  general  council.  And  why  especially  ?  Doth  the 
deliberation  of  a  council  help  any  thing  to  the  conclusion? 
Surely  not  in  your  opinion :  for  you  hold  the  conclusion  pro- 
phetical, the  means  fallible ;  and  fallible  deliberations  cannot 
advance  to  a  prophetic  conclusion.  And  just  as  the  council 
is  in  Stapleton's  judgment  for  the  definition  and  the  proofs, 
so  is  the  pope  in  the  judgment  of  aMelch.  Canus  and  them 
which  followed  him,  prophetical  in  the  conclusion.  The  coun- 
cil then  is  called  but  only  in  effect  to  hear  the  pope  give  his 
sentence  in  more  state  ;  else  what  means  this  of  b  Stapleton, 
"  The  pope,  by  a  council  joined  unto  him,  acquires  no  new 
power,  or  authority,  or  certainty  in  judging,  no  more  than 
a  head  is  the  wiser  by  joining  the  offices  of  the  rest  of  the 
members  to  it  than  it  is  without  them?"  or  this  of  cBel- 

z  Bellarm.  de  Coricil.  lib.  ii.  c.  16.  b  Relect.  Cont.   6.  q.   3.  Art.   5.  et 

et  J7«  ibid.     Quia  ad  compescendos  importu- 

a  Caiius  de  Locis,  lib.  vi.  cap.  8.  §.  nos  haereticos  concilii  generalis  definitio 

Et   quidem   in.     Pontifices    summi   in  illustrior  est,  &c.     Et  vulgo  hominum 

conclusione    errare   nequeunt,    rationes  magis  satisfacit,  &c. 

autem,  &c.  c  De  Rom.  Pont.  iv.  c.  3.  §.  At  contra, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

larmine,  "  That  all  the  firmness  and  infallibility  of  a  general  Sect.  33. 
council  is  only  from  the  pope,  not  partly  from  the  pope  and 
partly  from  the  council  T  So  belike  the  presence  is  neces- 
sary, not  the  assistance  ;  which  opinion  is  the  most  ground- 
less and  worthless  that  ever  offered  to  take  possession  of  the 
Christian  church.  And  I  am  persuaded  many  learned  men 
among  yourselves  scorn  it  at  the  very  heart :  and  I  avow  it, 
I  have  heard  some  learned  and  judicious  Roman  catholics 
utterly  condemn  it.  And  well  they  may:  for  no  man  can 
affirm  it,  but  he  shall  make  himself  a  scorn  to  all  the  learned 
men  of  Christendom,  whose  judgments  are  not  captivated  by 
Roman  power.  And  for  my  own  part,  I  am  clear  of  d  Jacobus 
Almain^s  opinion :  "  And  a  great  wonder  it  is  to  me,  that 
they  which  affirm  the  pope  cannot  err,  do  not  affirm  likewise 
that  he  cannot  sin  :  and  I  verily  believe  they  would  be  bold 
enough  to  affirm  it,  did  not  the  daily  works  of  the  popes 
compel  them  to  believe  the  contrary."  For  very  many  of 
them  have  led  lives  quite  contrary  to  the  gospel  of  Christ ; 
nay,  such  lives  as  no  Epicurean  monster  storied  out  to  the 
world  hath  outgone  them  in  sensuality,  or  other  gross  im- 
piety, if  their  own  historians  be  true.  Take  your  choice  of 
John6  the  Thirteenth  about  the  year  966,  or  of  Sylvester 
the  Second,  about  the  year  999,  or  John  the  Eighteenth, 
about  the  year  1003,  or  Benedict  the  Ninth,  about  the  year 
1033,  or  Boniface  the  Eighth,  about  the  year  1294,  or  Alex- 
ander the  Sixth,  about  the  year  1492 ;  and  yet  these  and 
their  like  must  be  infallible  in  their  dictates  and  conclusions 
of  faith.  Do  your  own  believe  it  ?  Surely  no ;  for  f  Alphon- 
sus  a  Castro  tells  us  plainly,  "  That  he  doth  not  believe  that 
any  man  can  be  so  gross  and  impudent  a  flatterer  of  the 
pope  as  to  attribute  this  unto  him,  that  he  can  neither  err, 
nor  mistake  in  expounding  the  holy  scripture."  This  comes 
home ;  and  therefore  it  may  well  be  thought  it  hath  taken 

nam.     Ex  quo  apparet  totam  firmita-  e  Platina  et  Onuphrius  in  Vitis  eorum. 

tem  conciliorum  legitimorum  esse  a  pon-  f  Non  enim  credo  aliquem  esse  adeo 

tifice,  non  partim  a  poutifice,  partim  a  impudentem  papae  assentatorem,  ut  ei 

concilio.  tribuere  hoc  velit,  ut  nee  errare,  nee  in 

d  Et  mirum  est,  quod  adversarii  non  interpretatione  S.  S.  literarum  halluci- 

asserant   eum   impeccabilem :  et  credo  nari  possit.   Alphons.  a  Castro,  advers. 

assererent,  nisi  quotidiana   summorum  Hseres.  lib.  i.  c.  4.    And  the  Gloss  con- 

pontiticum  opera  ad   credendum  oppo-  fesses  it  plainly  in  C.   24.  q.   I.  c.  A 

situm  compellerent.  Almain.  de  Author,  recta  ergo. 
Eccles.  c.  TO.  fine. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect  33.  a  shrewd  purge:  for  these  words  are  express  in  the  edition 
at  Paris,  1534 ;  but  they  are  not  to  be  found  in  that  at 
Colen,  1539,  nor  in  that  at  Antwerp,  1556.  nor  in  that  at 
Paris,  1571.  s Harding  says  indeed,  Alphonsus  left  it  out 
of  himself  in  the  following  editions.  Well ;  first,  Harding 
says  this,  but  proves  it  not ;  so  I  may  choose  whether  I  will 
believe  him  or  no  :  secondly,  be  it  so  that  he  did,  that  cannot 
help  their  cause  a  whit ;  for  say  he  did  dislike  the  sharpness 
of  the  phrase,  or  aught  else  in  this  speech,  yet  he  altered  not 
his  judgment  of  the  thing.  For  in  all  these  later  editions 
he  speaks  as  home,  if  not  more  than  in  the  first,  and  says 
expressly,  "  h  That  the  pope  may  err,  not  only  as  a  private 
person,  but  as  pope  ;"  and  in  difficult  cases  he  adds,  that  the 
pope  ought  to  consult  viros  doctos,  men  of  learning.  And 
this  also  was  the  opinion  of  the  ancient  church  of  Christ 
concerning  the  pope  and  his  infallibility.  For  thus  Liberius, 
and  he  a  pope  himself,  writes  to  Athanasius :  "  Brother 
Athanasius,  if  you  think  in  the  presence  of  God  and  Christ 
as  I  do,  I  pray  subscribe  this  confession,  which  is  thought 
to  be  the  true  faith  of  the  holy  catholic  and  apostolic  church, 
that  we  may  be  the  more  certain,  that  you  think  concerning 
the  faith  as  we  do ;  '  ut  ego  etiam  persuasus  sim  inhcesitanter, 
that  I  also  may  be  persuaded  without  all  doubting  of  those 
things  which  you  shall  be  pleased  to  command  me."  Now 
I  would  fain  know,  if  the  pope  at  that  time  were  or  did  think 
himself  infallible,  how  he  should  possibly  be  more  certainly 
persuaded  of  any  truth  belonging  to  the  faith  by  Athanasius 
his  concurring  in  judgment  with  him  :  for  nothing  can  make 
infallibility  more  certain  than  it  is,  at  least,  not  the  con- 
curring judgment  of  that  is  fallible,  as  St.  Athanasius  was. 
Beside,  the  pope  complimented  exceeding  low,  that  would 
submit  his  unerring  judgment  to  be  commanded  by  Athana- 
sius, who,  he  well  knew,  could  err.  Again,  in  the  case  of 
Easter,  (which  made  too  great  a  noise  in  the  church  of  old,) 
kvery  many  men  called  for  St.  Ambrose  his  judgment  in  that 

S  Harding   his  Detection  of  Errors  i  "iva  Kayk  ireiroi&tas  &  aSicutpirus  irepl 

against  Jewel,  p.  64.  &v  a|to?s  /ceAeuetv  /j.ol.   Liberius  in  Epist. 

h  Coelestinus  erravit  non   solum  ut  ad  Athanas.  apud  Athanas.  torn.  i.  p.  42. 

privata  persona,  sed  ut  papa,  &c.    Al-  edit.  Parisiens.    1608.     et   edit.   Paris, 

phons.  a  Castro,  advers.  Haeres.  lib.  i.  Latino-Gr.  1627. 

c.  4.  Ibid.  k  Post  yEgyptiorum  supputationes  et 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

point,  even  after  the  definition  of  the  church  of  Alexandria  Sect.  33. 
and  the  bishop  of  Rome ;  and  this  I  presume  they  would 
not  have  done,  had  they  then  conceived  either  the  pope 
or  his  church  infallible.  And  thus  it  continued  down  to 
Lyra's  time ;  for  he  says  expressly,  "  !  That  many  popes,  as 
well  as  other  inferiors,  have  not  only  erred,  but  even  quite 
apostatized  from  the  faith."  And  yet  now  nothing  but  in- 
fallibility will  serve  their  turns.  And  sometimes  they  have 
not  only  taken  upon  them  to  be  infallible  in  cathedra,  in 
their  chair  of  decision,  but  also  to  prophesy  infallibly  out 
of  the  scripture.  But  prophetical  scripture  (such  as  the 
Revelation  is)  was  too  dangerous  for  men  to  meddle  with 
which  would  be  careful  of  their  credit  in  not  erring :  for 
it  fell  out  in  the  time  of  Innocent  the  Third,  and  Honorius 
the  Third,  (as  mAventine  tells  us,)  "  that  the  then  popes 
assured  the  world,  that  destruction  was  at  hand  to  Sara- 
cens, Turks,  and  Mahometans ;  which  the  event  shewed 
were  notorious  untruths."  And  it  is  remarkable  which  hap- 
pened anno  1179;  f°r  then  m  a  council  held  at  Rome,  Baron,  an. 
pope  Alexander  the  Third  condemned  Peter  Lombard  Ofll79'n*13' 
heresy ;  and  he  lay  under  that  damnation  for  thirty  and 
six  years,  till  Innocent  the  Third  restored  him,  and  con- 
demned his  accusers.  Now  Peter  Lombard  was  then  con- 
demned for  something  which  he  had  written  about  the  human 
nature  of  our  Saviour  Christ.  So  here  was  a  great  mystery 
of  the  faith  in  hand,  something  about  the  incarnation ;  and 
the  pope  was  in  cathedra,  and  that  in  a  council  of  three 
hundred  archbishops  and  bishops;  and  in  this  council  he 
condemned  Peter  Lombard,  and  in  him  his  opinion  about 
the  incarnation;  and  therefore  of  necessity,  either  pope 
Alexander  erred,  and  that  in  cathedra,  as  pope,  in  condemn- 
ing him,  or  pope  Innocentius  in  restoring  him :  the  truth 
is,  pope  Alexander  had  more  of  Alexander  the  Great  than 
of  St.  Peter  in  him ;  and  being  accustomed  to  warlike  em- 

Alexandrinse  ecclesiae  definitionem,  epi-  quia  multi  principes  et  summi  ponti- 

scopiquoque  Roman*  ecclesiae  perliteras  fices,  et  alii  inferiores  inventi  sunt  apo- 

plerique  meam  adhuc  expectant  senten-  statasse  a  fide,  &c.     Lyra  in  S.  Matth. 

tiam,  quid  existimem  de   die   Paschae.  xvi.  18. 

S.  Ambr.  lib.  x.  epist.  83.  m  Rom.  pontifices   ex   historia,  &c. 

1  Ex   hoc    patet   quod    ecclesia   non  quae  mendacissima  esse  exitus  probavit. 

consistit  in  hominibus  ratione  potestatis  Aventin.  Annal.Boiorum,  lib.  vii.  p. 529. 

vel  dignitatis  ecclesiastics,  vel  saecularis,  edit.  Basil.  1580. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  ployments,  he  understood  not  that  which  Peter  Lombard 
had  written  about  this  mystery ;  and  so  he  and  his  learned 
assistants  condemned  him  unjustly. 

VIII. — And  whereas  you  profess  "after,  "  That  you  hold 
nothing  against  your  conscience,11  I  must  ever  wonder  much 
how  that  can  be  true,  since  you  hold  this  of  the  pope^s  infal- 
libility, especially  as  being  prophetical  in  the  conclusion.  If 
this  be  true,  why  do  you  not  lay  all  your  strength  together, 
all  of  your  whole  society,  and  make  this  one  proposition  evi- 
dent ?  For  all  controversies  about  matters  of  faith  are  ended, 
and  without  any  great  trouble  to  the  Christian  world,  if  you 
can  but  make  this  one  proposition  good,  That  the  pope  is  an 
infallible  judge.  Till  then,  this  shame  will  follow  you  infal- 
libly and  eternally,  that  you  should  make  the  pope,  a  mere 
man,  principium  fidei,  a  principle  or  author  of  faith ;  and 
make  the  mouth  of  him  whom  you  call  Chrises  vicar  sole 
judge,  both  of  Chrisfs  word,  be  it  never  so  manifest,  and  of 
his  church,  be  she  never  so  learned  and  careful  of  his  truth. 
And  for  conclusion  of  this  point,  I  would  fain  know  (since 
this  had  been  so  plain,  so  easy  a  way,  either  to  prevent  all 
divisions  about  the  faith,  or  to  end  all  controversies,  did  they 
arise)  why  this  brief  but  most  necessary  proposition,  "  The 
bishop  of  Rome  cannot  err  in  his  judicial  determinations  con- 
cerning the  faith,"  is  not  to  be  found  either  in  letter  or  sense, 
in  any  scripture,  in  any  council,  or  in  any  Father  of  the  church, 
for  the  full  space  of  a  thousand  years  and  more  after  Christ.  For 
had  this  proposition  been  true  and  then  received  in  the  church, 
how  weak  were  all  the  primitive  Fathers  to  prescribe  so  many 
rules  and  cautions  for  avoidance  of  heresy,  as  Tertullian,  and 
Vincentius  Lirinensis,  and  others  do,  and  to  endure  such  hard 
conflicts  as  they  did,  and  with  so  many  various  heretics ;  to 
see  Christendom  so  rent  and  torn  by  some  distempered  coun- 
cils, as  that  of  Ariminum,  the  second  of  Ephesus,  and  others; 
nay,  to  see  the  whole  world  almost  become  Arian,  to  the 
amazement  of  itself ;  and  yet  all  this  time  not  so  much  as  call 
in  this  necessary  assistance  of  the  pope,  and  let  the  world 
know,  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  was  infallible,  that  so  in  his 
decision  all  differences  might  cease  !  For  either  the  Fathers 

n  Apud  A.  C.  p.  68. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

of  the  church,  Greek  as  well  as  Latin,  knew  this  proposition  Sect.  33. 
to  be  true,  "  That  the  pope  cannot  err  judicially  in  matters 
belonging  to  the  faith,"  or  they  knew  it  not.  If  you  say  they 
knew  it  not,  you  charge  them  with  a  base  and  unworthy  ig- 
norance, no  ways  like  to  overcloud  such  and  so  many  learned 
men  in  a  matter  so  necessary,  and  of  such  infinite  use  to 
Christendom.  If  you  say  they  knew  it  and  durst  not  deliver 
this  truth,  how  can  you  charge  them  which  durst  die  for 
Christ  with  such  cowardice  towards  his  church  ?  And  if  you 
say  they  knew  it,  and  withheld  it  from  the  church,  you  lay  a 
most  unjust  load  upon  those  charitable  souls,  which  loved 
Christ  too  well  to  imprison  any  truth,  but  likely  to  make  or 
keep  peace  in  his  church  catholic  over  the  world.  But  cer- 
tainly, as  no  divine  of  worth  did  then  dream  of  any  such  in- 
fallibility in  him,  so  is  it  a  mere  dream,  or  worse,  of  those 
modern  divines  who  affirm  it  now.  °  And  as  P  St.  Augustine 
sometimes  spake  of  the  Donatists,  and  their  absurd  limiting 
the  whole  Christian  church  to  Africa  only,  so  may  I  truly 
say  of  the  Eomanists  confining  all  Christianity  to  the  Roman 
doctrine  governed  by  the  pope^s  infallibility  :  I  verily  per- 
suade myself  that  even  the  Jesuits  themselves  laugh  at  this. 
And  yet  unless  they  say  this,  which  they  cannot  but  blush 
while  they  say,  they  have  nothing  at  all  to  say.  But  what  is 
this  to  us  ?.  we  envy  no  man.  If  the  pope^s  decision  be  infal- 
lible, legant,  let  them  read  it  to  us  out  of  the  holy  scripture, 
and  we  will  believe  it. 

IX. — In  the  mean  time  take  this  with  you,  that  most  cer- 
tain it  is  that  the  pope  hath  no  infallibility  to  attend  his  ca- 
thedral judgment  in  things  belonging  to  the  faith.  For  first, 
besides  the  silence  of  impartial  antiquity,  divers  <l  of  your  own 
confess  it,  yea,  and  prove  it  too,  by  sundry  instances. 

X. — Secondly,    there   is   a   great    question   amongst   the 
learned,  both  schoolmen  and  controversers,  "  Whether  the 

o  "  The  wild  extent  of  the  pope's  in-  quod  erubescant  si  dicant,  non  habent 

fallibility  and  jurisdiction  is  a  mistake."  omnino  quod  dicant.    Sed  quid  ad  nos  ? 

These  are  the  words  of  a  great  Roman  Nemini  invidemus.     Legant  nobis  hoc 

catholic  uttered  to  myself:  but  I  will  de  scripturis   sanctis,   et   credimus.    S. 

spare   his  name,  because  he  is  living;  August,  de  Unit.  Eccles.  cap.  1 7. 

and  I  will  not  draw  your  envy  upon  1  Papa  non  solum  errore  personali, 

him.  sed  et  errore  judicial!  potest  errare  in 

P  Puto  quod  ipsi  etiam  rideant,  quum  materia  fidei.    Almain.  lib.  de  Author, 

hoc  audiunt,  et  tamen  nisi  hoc  dicant,  Eccles.  c.  10. 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  pope  coming  to  be  an  heretic  may  be  deposed ;"  and  it  is 
learnedly  disputed  by  rBellarmine.  The  opinions  are  dif- 
ferent. For  the  s  canon  law  says  expressly,  "  He  may  be 
judged  and  deposed  by  the  church  in  case  of  heresy."  *  Joh. 
de  Turrecremata  is  of  opinion  that  the  pope  is  to  be  de- 
posed by  the  church,  so  soon  as  he  becomes  an  heretic,  though 
as  yet  not  a  manifest  one,  because  he  is  already  deprived  by 
divine  right :  and  recites  another  opinion,  "  That  the  pope 
cannot  be  deposed,  though  he  fall  into  secret  or  manifest  he- 
resy." u  Cajetan  thinks  that  the  "  pope  cannot  be  deposed 
but  for  a  manifest  heresy ;  and  that  then  he  is  not  deposed 
ipso  facto,  but  must  be  deposed  by  the  church."  v  Bellarmine^s 
own  opinion  is,  "  That  if  the  pope  become  a  manifest  heretic, 
he  presently  ceases  to  be  pope  and  head  of  the  church,  and 
may  then  be  judged  and  punished  by  the  church."  Bellar- 
mine  hath  disputed  this  very  learnedly,  and  at  large ;  and  I 
will  not  fill  this  discourse  with  another  man's  labours.  The 
use  I  shall  make  of  it  runs  through  all  these  opinions,  and 
through  all  alike.  And  truly  the  very  question  itself  sup- 
poses that  a  pope  may  be  an  heretic.  For  if  he  cannot  be 
an  heretic,  why  do  they  question  whether  he  can  be  deposed 
for  being  one  ?  And  if  he  can  be  one,  then  whether  he  can 
be  deposed  by  the  church  before  he  be  manifest,  or  not  till 
after,  or  neither  before  nor  after,  or  which  way  they  will,  it 
comes  all  to  one  for  my  purpose  :  for  I  question  not  here  his 
deposition  for  his  heresy,  but  his  heresy.  And  I  hope  none 
of  these  learned  men,  nor  any  other,  dare  deny  but  that  if 
the  pope  can  be  an  heretic,  he  can  err.  For  every  heresy  is 
an  error,  and  more.  For  it  is  an  error  ofttimes  against  the 
errant's  knowledge,  but  ever  with  the  pertinacy  of  his  will. 
Therefore  out  of  all  even  your  own  grounds,  if  the  pope  can 
be  an  heretic,  he  can  err  grossly,  he  can  err  wilfully.  And 
he  that  can  so  err  cannot  be  infallible  in  his  judgment,  pri- 
vate or  public  :  for  if  he  can  be  an  heretic,  he  can,  and  doubt - 

r  De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  ii.  c.  30.  facto,  vel  jure  divino  vel  humano,  de- 

s  Si  sit  a  fide  devius.    Dist.  40.  Can.  positus,  sed  deponendus.     Cajet.  Tract. 

Si  papa.  de  Author.  Papae  et  Concilii,  c.  20. 
t  Jure   divino  papatu   privatus  est,         v   Papa  haereticiis  manifestus  per  se 

&c.    Jo.  de  Turrecr.  1.  iv.  par.  ii.  c.  20.  desinit  esse  papa  et  caput,  &c. ;    et  turn 

et  Bellarm.  de  Rom.    Pont.  lib.  ii.  c.  potest  ab  ecclesia  judicari,   et  puniri. 

30-  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  ii.  c.  30. 

«  Papa  factns  haereticus  non  est  ipso  §.  Est  ergo  quinta. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  227 

less  will,  judge  for  his  heresy,  if  the  church  let  him  alone.  Sect.  33. 
And  you  yourselves  maintain  his  deposition  lawful  to  prevent 
this.  I  verily  believe  wAlb.  Pighius  foresaw  this  blow,  and 
therefore  he  is  of  opinion  "  that  the  pope  cannot  become  an 
heretic  at  all.""  And  though  xBellarmine  favour  him  so  far 
as  to  say  his  opinion  is  probable,  yet  he  is  so  honest  as  to 
add,  that  "  the  common  opinion  of  divines  is  against  him." 
Nay,  though  yhe  labour  hard  to  excuse  pope  Honorius  the 
First  from  the  heresy  of  the  Monothelites,  and  says  that 
pope  Adrian  was  deceived  who  thought  him  one;  yet  zhe 
confesses,  "  That  pope  Adrian  the  Second,  with  the  council 
then  held  at  Rome,  and  the  eighth  general  synod,  did  think 
that  the  pope  might  be  judged  in  the  cause  of.  heresy ;  and 
that  the  condition  of  the  church  were  most  miserable,  if  it 
should  be  constrained  to  acknowledge  a  wolf  manifestly  raging 
for  her  shepherd."  And  here  again  I  have  a  question  to  ask ; 
Whether  you  believe  the  eighth  general  council  or  not?  If 
you  believe  it,  then  you  see  the  pope  can  err,  and  so  he  not 
infallible.  If  you  believe  it  not,  then,  in  your  judgment,  that 
general  council  errs,  and  so  that  not  infallible. 

XI. — Thirdly,  it  is  altogether  vain  and  to  no  use  that  the 
pope  should  be  infallible,  and  that  according  to  your  own 
principles.  Now  God  and  nature  make  nothing  in  vain ;  there- 
fore either  the  pope  is  not  infallible,  or  at  least,  God  never 
made  him  so.  That  the  infallibility  of  the  pope  (had  he  any 
in  him)  is  altogether  vain  and  useless,  is  manifest.  For  if  it 
be  of  any  use.  it  is  for  the  settling  of  truth  and  peace  in  the 
church  in  all  times  of  her  distraction.  But  neither  the  church 
nor  any  member  of  it  can  make  any  use  of  the  pope's  infal- 
libility that  way :  therefore  it  is  of  no  use  or  benefit  at  all. 
And  this  also  is  as  manifest  as  the  rest.  For  before  the 
church  or  any  particular  man  can  make  any  use  of  this  infal- 
libility to  settle  him  and  his  conscience,  he  must  either  know 
or  believe  that  the  pope  is  infallible :  but  a  man  can  neither 

w  Pighius,  Ecclesiasticse  Hierarchies  tota  synodus  octava  generalis  senserit, 

lib.  iv.  cap.  8.  in  causa  haeresis  posse  Rom.  pont.  judi- 

*  Communis  opinio  est  in  contra-  can.  Adde  quod  esset  miserrima  con- 
Hum.  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  ii.  ditio  ecclesiae,  si  lupum  manifesto  gras- 
c.  30.  §.  i.  santem  pro  pastore  agnoscere  cogeretur. 

y  De  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  n.  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  ii.  c.  30. 

z  Tameri  non  possumus  negare,  quin  §.5. 
Adrianus  cum  Romano  concilio,  imo  et 

Q  2 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  know  nor  believe  it.  And  first,  for  belief :  for  if  the  church 
or  any  Christian  man  can  believe  it,  he  must  believe  it  either 
by  divine  or  by  human  faith.  Divine  faith  cannot  be  had  of 
it :  for  (as  is  before  proved)  it  hath  no  ground  in  the  written 
word  of  God ;  nay,  (to  follow  you  closer,)  it  was  never  deli- 
vered by  any  tradition  of  the  catholic  church.  And  for  hu- 
man faith,  no  rational  man  can  possibly  believe  (having  no 
word  of  God  to  overrule  his  understanding)  that  he  which  is 
fallible  in  the  means,  as  a  yourselves  confess  the  pope  is,  can 
possibly  be  infallible  in  the  conclusion ;  and  were  it  so,  that 
a  rational  man  could  have  human  faith  of  this  infallibility ; 
yet  that  neither  is  nor  ever  can  be  sufficient  to  make  the  pope 
infallible,  no  more  than  my  strong  belief  of  another  man's 
honesty  can  make  him  an  honest  man  if  he  be  not  so.  Now, 
secondly,  for  knowledge;  and  that  is  altogether  impossible 
too,  that  either  the  church  or  any  member  of  the  church  should 
ever  know  that  the  pope  is  infallible :  and  this  I  shall  make 
evident  also  out  of  your  own  principles.  For  your  b  council  of 
Florence  had  told  us,  that  three  things  are  necessary  to 
every  sacrament ;  the  matter,  the  form  of  the  sacrament,  and 
the  intention  of  the  priest  which  administers  it,  that  he  in- 
tends to  do  as  the  church  doth.  Your  c  council  of  Trent  con- 
firms it  for  the  intention  of  the  priest.  Upon  this  ground 
(be  it  rock  or  sand,  it  is  all  one  ;  for  you  make  it  rock  and 
build  upon  it)  I  shall  raise  this  battery  against  the  pope's  in- 
fallibility. First,  the  pope,  if  he  have  any  infallibility  at  all, 
he  hath  it  as  he  is  bishop  of  Rome  and  St.  Peter's  successor. 
dThis  is  granted.  Secondly,  the  pope  cannot  be  bishop  of 
Borne,  but  he  must  be  in  holy  orders  first ;  and  if  any  man 
be  chosen  that  is  not  so,  the  election  is  void  ipso  facto,  propter 
err  or  em  personce,  for  the  error  of  the  person.  eThis  also  is 
granted.  Thirdly,  he  that  is  to  be  made  pope  can  never  be 
in  holy  orders  but  by  receiving  them  from  one  that  hath 
power  to  ordain :  this  is  notoriously  known ;  so  is  it  also, 

a  Stapl.  Relect.  Cont.  4.  q.  2.  Notab.  4.  e  Constantinus   ex  laico  papa  circa 

b  Orrmia  sacramenta  tribus  perficiun-  an.  767.  ejectus  papatu.    Et  Steph.  III. 

tur,  &c.  Decret.  Eugen.  4.  in  Concil.  qui  successit,  habito  concilio  statuit,  ne 

Florent.  quis,  nisi  per  gradus  ecclesiasticos  ascen- 

c  Concil.  Trid.  Sess.  7 .  Can.  i .  dens  pontificatum,  occupare  auderet  sub 

d  Bellarm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  poena  anathematis.     Decret.  Dist.  79. 

3.  §.  Alterum  privilegium  est.  c.  Nullus. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 

that  with  you  order  is  a  sacrament  properly  so  called :  and  if  Sect.  33. 
so,  then  the  pope,  when  he  did  receive  the  order  of  deacon  or 
priesthood  at  the  hands  of  the  bishop,  did  also  receive  a  sa- 
crament. Upon  these  grounds  I  raise  my  argument,  thus : 
Neither  the  church  nor  any  member  of  the  church  can  know 
that  this  pope  which  now  sits,  or  any  other  that  hath  been 
or  shall  be,  is  infallible.  For  he  is  not  infallible  unless  he  be 
pope,  and  he  is  not  pope  unless  he  be  in  holy  orders  ;  and  he 
cannot  be  so  unless  he  have  received  those  holy  orders,  and 
that  from  one  that  had  power  to  ordain ;  and  those  holy 
orders,  in  your  doctrine,  are  a  sacrament ;  and  a  sacrament  is 
not  perfectly  given,  if  he  that  administers  it  have  not  inten- 
tionem  faciendi  quod  facit  ecclesia,  an  intention  to  do  that 
which  the  church  doth  by  sacraments.  Now  who  can  possibly 
tell  that  the  bishop  which  gave  the  pope  orders  was,  first,  a 
man  qualified  to  give  them;  and,  secondly,  so  devoutly  set 
upon  his  work,  that  he  had  at  the  instant  of  giving  them  an 
intention  and  purpose  to  do  therein  as  the  church  doth? 
Surely  none  but  the  bishop  himself.  And  his  testimony  of 
himself  and  his  own  act,  such  especially  as,  if  faulty,  he  would 
be  loath  to  confess,  can  neither  give  knowledge  nor  belief  suf- 
ficient, that  the  pope,  according  to  this  canon,  is  in  holy 
orders.  So  upon  the  whole  matter,  let  the  Romanists  take 
which  they  will,  (I  give  them  free  choice,)  either  this  ca- 
non of  the  council  of  Trent  is  false  divinity,  and  there  is  no 
such  intention  necessary  to  the  essence  and  being  of  a  sacra- 
ment ;  or  if  it  be  true,  it  is  impossible  for  any  man  to  know, 
and  for  any  advised  man  to  believe,  that  the  pope  is  infallible 
in  his  judicial  sentences  in  things  belonging  to  the  faith.  And 
so  here  again  a  general  council,  at  least  such  an  one  as  that  of 
Trent  is,  can  err,  or  the  pope  is  not  infallible. 

XII. — But  this  is  an  argument  ad  hominem,  good  against 
your  party  only  which  maintain  this  council.  But  the  plain 
truth  is,  both  are  errors.  For  neither  is  the  bishop  of  Rome 
infallible  in  his  judicials  about  the  faith,  nor  is  this  intention 
of  either  bishop  or  priest  of  absolute  necessity  to  the  essence 
of  a  sacrament,  so  as  to  make  void  the  gracious  institution 
of  Christ,  in  case  by  any  tentation  the  priest1  s  thoughts  should 
wander  from  his  work  at  the  instant  of  using  the  essentials 
of  a  sacrament,  or  have  in  him  an  actual  intention  to  scorn 

230  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  the  church.  And  you  may  remember,  if  you  please,  that  a 
Neapolitan  fbishop  then  present  at  Trent  disputed  this  case 
very  learnedly,  and  made  it  most  evident,  that  this  opinion 
cannot  be  defended,  but  that  it  must  open  a  way  for  any  un- 
worthy priest  to  make  infinite  nullities  in  administration  of 
the  sacraments.  And  his  arguments  were  of  such  strength, 
Sut  cceteros  theologos  dederint  in  stuporem,  as  amazed  the  other 
divines  which  were  present.  And  concluded,  "  That  no  in- 
ternal intention  was  required  in  the  minister  of  a  sacrament, 
but  that  intention  which  did  appear  opere  externo,  in  the  work 
itself  performed  by  him  ;  and  that  if  he  had  unworthily  any 
wandering  thoughts,  nay  more,  any  contrary  intention  within 
him,  yet  it  neither  did  nor  could  hinder  the  blessed  effect  of 
any  sacrament."  And  most  certain  it  is,  if  this  be  not  true, 
besides  all  other  inconveniences,  which  are  many,  no  man  can 
secure  himself,  upon  any  doubt  or  trouble  in  his  conscience, 
that  he  hath  truly  and  really  been  made  partaker  of  any  sa- 
crament whatsoever,  no,  not  of  baptism  ;  and  so  by  conse- 
quence be  left  in  doubt  whether  he  be  a  Christian  or  no,  even 
after  he  is  baptized.  Whereas  it  is  most  impossible  that  Christ 
should  so  order  his  sacraments,  and  so  leave  them  to  his 
church,  as  that  poor  believers  in  his  name,  by  any  unworthi- 
ness  of  any  of  his  priests,  should  not  be  able  to  know  whether 
they  have  received  his  sacraments  or  not,  even  while  they 
have  received  them.  And  yet  for  all  this,  such  great  lovers 
of  truth  and  such  careful  pastors  over  the  flock  of  Christ 
were  these  Trent  Fathers,  that  they  regarded  none  of  this, 
but  went  on  in  the  usual  track,  and  made  their  decree  for  the 
internal  intention  and  purpose  of  the  priest,  and  that  the  sa- 
crament was  invalid  without  it. 

XIII. — Nay,  one  argument  more  there  is,  and  from  your  own 
grounds  too,  that  makes  it  more  than  manifest  that  the  pope 
can  err,  not  personally  only,  but  judicially  also ;  and  so  teach 
false  doctrine  to  the  church,  which  h Bellarmine  tells  us  "no 
pope  hath  done  or  can  do."  And  a  maxim  it  is  with  you, 
"  That  a  general  council  can  err,  if  it  be  not  confirmed  by  the 

f  Minorensis  episcopus  fuit.  clesiam  docet,  in  his  quae  ad  lidem  per- 

g  Hist.  Trident,  lib.  ii.  p.  276,  277.  tinent  nullo  casu  errare  potest.      Bel- 

Leidae,  an.  1622.  larm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  3.  §.  i. 
h  Summus  pontifex  quum  totam  ec- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  231 

pope  ;  >  but  if  it  be  confirmed,  then  it  cannot  err."     Where,  Sect.  33. 
first,  this  is  very  improper  language :  for  I  hope  no  council  is 
confirmed  till  it  be  finished  ;  and  when  it  is  finished,  even  be- 
fore the  pope's  confirmation  be  put  to  it,  either  it  hath  erred 
or  not  erred.     If  it  have  erred,  the  pope  ought  not  to  confirm 
it ;  and  if  he  do,  it  is  a  void  act :    for  no  power  can  make 
falsehood  truth.     If  it  have  not  erred,  then  it  was  true  be- 
fore the  pope  confirmed  it.     So  his  confirmation  adds  nothing 
but  his  own  assent :  therefore  his  confirmation  of  a  general 
council  (as  you  will  needs  call  it)  is  at  the  most  signum,non  causa, 
a  sign,  and  that  such  as  may  fail,  but  no  cause  of  the  coun- 
cil's not  erring.     But  then  secondly,  if  a  general  council  con- 
firmed (as  you  would  have  it)  by  the  pope  have  erred,  and  so 
can  err,  then  certainly  the  pope  can  err  judicially.     For  he 
never  gives  a  more  solemn  sentence  for  truth  than  when  he 
decrees  any  thing  in  a  general  council.     Therefore,  if  he  have 
erred  and  can  err  there,  then  certainly  he  can  err  in  his  de- 
finitive sentence  about  the  faith,  and  is  not  infallible.     Now 
that  he  hath  erred,  and  therefore  can  err  in  a  general  council 
confirmed,  in  which  he  takes  upon  him  to  teach  all  Christen- 
dom, is  most  clear  and  evident.     For  the  pope  teaches  in  and 
by  the  k  council  of  Lateran  confirmed  by  Innocent  the  Third, 
Christ  is  present  in  the  sacrament  by  way  of  transubstantia- 
tion  ;    and   in  and  by  the  !  council  of  Constance,  the  admi- 
nistration of  the  blessed  sacrament  to  the  laity  in  one  kind, 
notwithstanding  Christ's  institution  of  it  in  both  kinds  for  all ; 
and  in  and  by  the  m  council  of  Trent,  invocation  of  saints, 
and  adoration  of  images,  to  the  great  scandal  of  Christianity, 
and  as  great  hazard  of  the  weak.     Now  that  these  particu- 
lars among  many  are  errors  in  divinity,  and  about  the  faith, 
is  manifest  both  by  scripture  and  the  judgment  of  the  primitive 
church.    For  transubstantiation  first,  that  was  never  heard  of 
in  the  primitive  church,  nor  till  the  council  of  Lateran ;  nor 
can  it  be  proved  out  of  scripture  ;  and  taken  properly  cannot 
stand  with  the  grounds  of  Christian  religion.     As  for  commu- 
nion in  one  kind,  Christ's  institution  is  clear  against  that. 

i  Concilia  generalia  a  pontifice  con-         1  Concil.  Const.  Sess.  13. 
firmata  errare  non  possunt.     Bellarm.         in  Concil.  Trid.  Sess.  25.    Decret.  de 

de  Concil.  lib.  ii.  c.  i.  §.  r.  Invocatione. 

k  Concil.  Later.  Can.  i. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.   And  not  only  the  primitive  church,  but  the  whole  church  of 
Christ  kept  it  so,  till  within  less  than  four  hundred  years.  For 
n  Aquinas  confesses  it  was  so  in  use  even  to  his  time,  and  he 
was  both  born  and  dead  during  the  reign  of  Henry  the  Third 
of  England.     Nay,  it  stands  yet  as  a  monument  in  the  very 
0  Missal,  against  the  present  practice  of  the  church  of  Rome, 
that  then  it  was  usually  given  and  received  in  both  kinds. 
And  for  invocation  of  saints,  though  some  of  the  ancient  Fa- 
thers have  some  rhetorical  flourishes  about  it,  for  the  stirring 
up  of  devotion,  (as  they  thought,)  yet  the  church  then  ad- 
mitted not  of  the  innovation  of  them,  but  only  of  the  com- 
memoration of  the  martyrs,  as  appears  clearly  in  F  St.  Au- 
gustine.    And  when  the  church  prayed  to  God  for  any  thing, 
she  desired  to  be  heard  for  the  mercies  and  the  merits  of  Christ, 
not  for  the  merits  of  any  saints  whatsoever.     For  I  much 
doubt  this  were  to  make  the  saints  more  than  mediators  of 
intercession,  which  is  all  that  q  you  acknowledge  you  allow  the 
saints.      For  I  pray,  is  not  by  the  merits  more  than  by  the 
intercession  ?    Did  not  Christ  redeem  us  by  his  merits  ?    and 
if  God  must  hear  our  prayers  for  the  merits  of  the  saints, 
how  much  fall  they  short  of  sharers  in  the  r  mediation  of  re- 
demption?   You  may  think  of  this.     For  such  prayers  as 
these  the  church  of  Borne  makes  at  this  day,  and  they  stand 
(not  without  great  scandal  to  Christ  and  Christianity)  used, 
and   authorized   to  be  used  in   the  Missal.     For  instance : 
upon  the  feast s  of  St.  Nicholas  you  pray,  "  that  God,  by  the 
merits  and  prayers  of  St.  Nicholas,  would  deliver  you  from 
the  fire  of  hell."     And  upon  the  octaves  of  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul,  lyou  desire  God  "  that  you  may  obtain  the  glory  of 

n  Provide  in  quibusdam  ecclesiis  ob-  q  Bellarm.  de  Sanctor.  Beatitud.  lib. 

servatur,  ut  populo  sanguis  non  detur.  i.  c.  20.  §.  Ad  primum  ergo  locum,  &c. 

Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  80.  A.  I2.C.  So  it  was  r  Sunt    redemptores     riostri     aliquo 

but  in  some  churches  in  his  time — Ne-  modo  et  secundum  aliquid.   Bellarm.  de 

gare   non    possumus  etiam  in  ecclesia  Indulgent,  lib.  i.  c.  4  :    et  sanctos  ap- 

Latina   fuisse  usum  utriusque  speciei,  pellat  numina,  de  Imagin.  Sanctorum, 

et  usque  ad  tempora  S.  Thomae  durasse.  lib.  ii.  c.  20.  §.  3.     Now  if  this  word 

Vasq.  in  3.  Disput.  216.  c.  3.  n.  38.  (numen*)  signify  any  thing  else  besides 

o  Refecti  cibo  potuque  ccelesti,  Deus  God  himself,  or  the  power  of  God,  or 

noster,  te  supplices  exoramus,  &c.     In  the  oracle  of  God,  let  Bellarmine  shew 

proprio  Missarum  de  Sanctis,  Jan.  15.  it,  or  A.  C.  for  him. 

Orat.  post  Communionem.  Et  Jan.  21.  s  Ut  ejus  meritis  et  precibus  a  ge- 

P  Ad  quod  sacrificium  suo   loco   et  hennae   incendiis   liberemur.      In    pro- 

ordine  homines  Dei   nominantur,  non  prio  Missarum  de  Sanctis,  Decernb.  6. 

tamen  a  sacerdote,  qui  sacrificat,  invo-  t    Ut    amborum    meritis    aiternitatis 

cantur.    S.  August.  Civ.  Dei,  lib.  xxii.  gloriam  consequamur.  Ibid.  Julii  6. 
c.  10. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  233 

eternity  by  their  merits."  And  on  the  u feast  of  St.  Bonaven-  Sect.  33. 
ture,  you  pray,  "  that  God  would  absolve  you  from  all  your 
sins  by  the  interceding  merits  of  Bonaven  ture."  And  for 
adoration  of  images,  the  x ancient  church  knew  it  not.  And 
the  modern  church  of  Eome  is  too  like  to  paganism  in  the 
practice  of  it,  and  driven  to  scarce  intelligible  stibtilties  in 
her  servants1  writings  that  defend  it ;  and  this  without  any 
care  had  of  millions  of  souls,  unable  to  understand  her  sub- 
tilties  or  shun  her  practice.  Did  I  say  the  modern  church  of 
Eome  is  grown  too  like  paganism  in  this  point?  and  may 
this  speech  seem  too  hard  ?  Well,  if  it  do,  I  will  give  a  double 
account  of  it.  The  one  is  ;  It  is  no  harsher  expression  than 
they  of  Eome  use  of  the  protestants,  and  in  cases  in  which 
there  is  no  show  or  resemblance :  for  yBecanus  tells  us,  "  It 
is  no  more  lawful  to  receive  the  sacrament  as  the  Calvinists  re- 
ceive it,  than  to  worship  idols  with  the  ethnics."  And  Gregory 
de  Valentia  enlarges  it  to  more  points  than  one,  but  with  no 
more  truth.  "  z  The  sectaries  of  our  times,"  saith  he,  "  seem  to 
err  culpably  in  more  things  than  the  Gentiles."  This  is  easily 
said,  but  here  is  no  proof :  nor  shall  I  hold  it  a  sufficient  war- 
rant for  me  to  sour  my  language,  because  these  men  have 
dipped  their  pens  in  gall.  The  other  account,  therefore,  which 
I  shall  give  of  this  speech,  shall  come  vouched  both  by  au- 
thority and  reason.  And  first  for  authority,  I  could  set  Lu- 
dovicus  Vives  against  Becanus,  if  I  would,  who  says  expressly, 
"  That  the  making  of  feasts  at  the  oratories  of  the  martyrs'*' 
(which  a  St.  Augustine  tells  us  the  best  Christians  practised 
not)  "  are  a  kind  of  bparentalia,  funeral  feasts,  too  much  re- 
sembling the  superstition  of  the  Gentiles."  Nay,  Vives  need 
not  say  "  resembling  that  superstition,"  since  c  Tertullian  tells 

"  Ejus    intercedentibus    meritis    ab  z  Contingit  aliquando  haereticos  circa 

omnibus    nos    absolve    peccatis.     Ibid,  plura  errare  quam  Gentiles,  ut  Mani- 

Julii  14.  cha?os,  inquit  Thomas.     Quod  nos  pos- 

x  In  Optatus  his  time  the  Christians  sumus  vere   dicere   de  nostri  temporis 

were  much  troubled  upon  but  a  false  sectariis,  qui  culpabiliter  in  pluribus  vi- 

report,  that  an  image  was  to  be  placed  dentur  errare.  Valentia  in  2.  aae.  Disp. 

upon  the  altar.    What  would  they  have  i.  q.  TO.  punct.  3. 

done     if    adoration    had     been    com-  a  Quod  quidem  a  Christianis  melio- 

manded  ?    &c.     Et  recte  dictum  erat,  ribns  non  fit.     S.  August,  de  Civ.  Dei, 

si  talem  famam  similis  veritas  sequere-  lib.  viii.  c.  27. 

tur.    Optat.  lib.  iii.  ad  finem.  b  Ilia  quasi  parentalia   superstitioni 

y  Sicut  non  licet  cum  ethnicis  idola  Gentilium  simillima.    Lud.  Vives   Ibid, 

colere.  Becan.  L.  de  Fide  Haeret.  servan-  c  Quod  ergo  mortuis  litabatur,  utique 

da,  c.  8.  parentationi  deputabatur,  quae   species 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33.  us  plainly,  "  that  idolatry  itself  is  but  a  kind  of  parentation." 
And  Vives,  dying  in  the  communion  of  the  church  of  Rome,  is 
a  better  testimony  against  you,  than  Becanus  or  Valentia, 
being  bitter  enemies  to  our  communion,  can  be  against  us. 
But  I  will  come  nearer  home  to  you,  and  prove  it  by  more  of 
your  own.  For  d  Cassander,  who  lived  and  died  in  your  com- 
munion, says  it  expressly,  "  That  in  this  present  case  of  the 
adoration  of  images,  you  came  full  home  to  the  superstition 
of  the  heathen."  And  secondly,  for  reason  I  have  (I  think) 
too  much  to  give,  that  the  modern  church  of  Rome  is  grown 
too  like  to  paganism  in  this  point.  For  the  e  council  of  Trent 
itself  confesses,  That  to  believe  there  is  a"ny  divinity  in  images, 
is  to  do  as  the  Gentiles  did  by  their  idols.  And  though  in 
some  words  after,  the  Fathers  of  that  council  seem  very  reli- 
giously careful  that  all  f  occasion  of  dangerous  error  be  pre- 
vented, yet  the  doctrine  itself  is  so  full  of  danger,  that  it 
works  strongly  both  upon  the  learned  and  unlearned,  to  the 
scandal  of  religion  and  the  perverting  of  truth.  For  the 
unlearned  first,  how  it  works  upon  them  by  whole  countries 
together,  you  may  see  by  what  happened  in  Asturias,  Canta- 
bria,  Galicia,  no  small  parts  of  Spain.  For  there  the  people 
(so  she  tells  me  that  was  an  eyewitness,  and  that  since  the 
council  of  Trent)  "  are  so  addicted  to  their  worm-eaten  and 
deformed  images,  that  when  the  bishops  commanded  new 
and  handsomer  images  to  be  set  up  in  their  rooms,  the  poor 
people  cried  for  their  old,  would  not  look  up  to  their  new,  as 
if  they  did  not  represent  the  same  thing."  And  though  he 
say  this  'is  by  little  and  little  amended,  yet  I  believe  there  is 
very  little  amendment.  And  it  works  upon  the  learned  too 
more  than  it  should.  For  it  wrought  so  far  upon  Lamas 

proinde  idololatriae  est,  quoniam  et  ido-  rejecting  the  opinion  of  Thomas,  and 

lolatria  parentationis  est  species.    Tert.  other  superstitions  concerning  images. 

lib.  de  Spectaculis,  c.  12.  Ibid. 

d  Manifestius   est,   quam    Tit   multis  e  Non  quod  credatur  inesse  aliqua  in 

verbis   explicari    debeat,   imaginum   et  iis  diviriitas,  et  veluti  olim  fiebat  a  gen- 

simulachrorum   cultum    nimium   inva-  tibus.    Cone.   Trid.  Sess.  25.     Decret. 

luisse,  et  affectioni  sen  potius  supersti-  de  Invocat. 

tioni  populi  plus  satis  indultum  esse,  ita,  f  Et  rudibus  periculosi  erroris  occa- 

ut  ad  summam  adorationem,  quse  vel  a  sionem,  &c.    Ibid. 

paganis,  suis  simulachris  exhiberi  con-  g  Et   adeo  gens   affecta  est  tmncis 

suevit,  &c.    Cassand.  Consult.  Art.  21.  corrosis  et  deformibus  imaginibus,  ut, 

c.  de  Imaginibus       Where   he  names  me  teste,    quoties   episcopi    decentiores 

divers   of  your  own,  as  namely,    Du-  ponere  jubent,  veteres  suas  petant  plo- 

rautus  Miniatensis  episcopus,  John  Bil-  rantes,   &c.     Hieron.    Lamas   Summa, 

let,  Gerson,  Durand,  Plolkot,  and  Biel,  p.  3.  c.  3. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  235 

himself,  who  bemoaned  the  former  passage,  as  that  he  deli-  Sect.  33. 
vers  this  doctrine  :  "  h  That  the  images  of  Christ,  the  blessed 
Virgin,  and  the  saints,  are  not  to  be  worshipped,  as  if  there 
were  any  divinity  in  the  images,  as  they  are  material  things 
made  by  art,  but  only  as  they  represent  Christ  and  the  saints; 
for  else  it  were  idolatry."  So  then  belike,  according  to  the 
divinity  of  this  casuist,  a  man  may  worship  images,  and  ask 
of  them,  and  put  his  trust  in  them,  as  they  represent  Christ 
and  the  saints.  For  so  there  is  divinity  in  them,  though  not 
as  things,  yet  as  representers.  And  what,  I  pray,  did  or  could 
any  pagan"  priest  say  more  than  this  ?  for  the  proposition 
resolved  is  this :  "  The  images  of  Christ  and  the  saints,  as 
they  represent  their  exemplars,  have  deity  or  divinity  in 
them.""  And  now  I  pray  A.  C.  do  you  be  judge,  whether  this 
proposition  do  not  teach  idolatry,  and  whether  the  modern 
church  of  Rome  be  not  grown  too  like  to  paganism  in  this 
point.  For  my  own  part  I  heartily  wish  it  were  not,  and 
that  men  of  learning  would  not  strain  their  wits  to  spoil  the 
truth  and  rent  the  peace  of  the  church  of  Christ,  by  such 
dangerous,  such  superstitious  vanities ;  for  better  they  are 
not,  but  they  may  be  worse  :  nay,  these  and  their  like  have 
given  so  great  a  scandal  among  us,  to  some  ignorant,  though, 
I  presume,  well  meaning  men,  that  they  are  afraid  to  testify 
their  duty  to  God,  even  in  his  own  house,  by  any  outward  ges- 
ture at  all.  Insomuch  that  those  very  ceremonies,  which  by 
the  judgment  of  godly  and  learned  men  have  now  long  conti- 
nued in  the  practice  of  this  church,  suffer  hard  measure  for 
the  Romish  superstition's  sake.  But  I  will  conclude  this 
point  with  the  saying  of  B.  Rhenanus :  "  >  Who  could  endure 
the  people,"  says  he,  "  rushing. into  the  church  like  swine  into  a 
sty  ?  Doubtless  ceremonies  do  not  hurt  the  people,  but  profit 
them,  so  there  be  a  mean  kept,  and  the  by  be  not  put  for  the 
main,  that  is,  so  we  place  not  the  principal  part  of  our  piety 
in  them." 

11  Imagines  Christi  et  S.  matris  ejus         i  Quis    ferat    populum   in   templum 

et  sanctorum  non  sunt  venerandae,   ac  irrueritem,  ceu  in  haram  sues  ?    Certe 

si  in   ipsis  imaginibus   esset  divinitas,  non  obsunt  populo  ceremoniae,  sed  pro- 

secmidum  quod  sunt  materia  arte  effi-  sunt,  si  modus  in  eis  servetur,  et  cavea- 

giata,  et  non  secundum  quod  repraesen-  mus  ne  iraptpya  T&V  epywv  loco  habean- 

tant  Christum,  et  sanctos,  &c.  Sicenim  tur,  hoc  est,  ne  praecipuam  pietatem  in 

adorare,  vel  petere  aliquid  ab  iis,  esset  illis  collocemus.    Rhen.  annot.  in  Ter- 

idololatria.    Lam.  ibid.  tul.  de  Cor.  Mil. 

236  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  33-35.     The  conference  grows  to  an  end,  and  I  must  meet  it  again 
ere  we  part.     For  you  say, 

.df .  After  this  (we  all  rising)  the  lady  asked  the  23,  whether 
she  might  be  saved  in  the  Roman  faith  ?  He  answered, 
she  might. 

Sect.  34.  23,  What !  not  one  k  answer  perfectly  related  !  My  answer 
to  this  was  general,  for  the  ignorant  that  could  not  discern 
the  errors  of  that  church,  so  they  held  the  foundation,  and 
conformed  themselves  to  a  religious  life.  But  why  do  you 
not  speak  out  what  I  added  in  this  particular,  "  That  it 
must  needs  go  harder  with  the  lady,  even  in  point  of  salva- 
tion, because  she  had  been  brought  to  understand  very  much, 
for  one  of  her  condition,  in  these  controverted  causes  of  reli- 
gion; and  a  person  that  comes  to  know  much  had  need 
carefully  bethink  himself,  that  he  oppose  not  known  truth 
against  the  church  that  made  him  a  Christian  ?"  for  salvation 
may  be  in  the  church  of  Rome,  and  yet  they  not  find  it  that 
A.  C.  p.  64.  make  surest  of  it.  Here  A.  C.  is  as  confident  as  the  Jesuit 
himself,  "  that  I  said  expressly,  that  the  lady  might  be 
saved  in  the  Roman  faith."  Truly,  it  is  too  long  since  now 
for  me  to  speak  any  more  than  I  have  already  upon  my 
memory;  but  this  I  am  sure  of,  that  whatsoever  I  said  of 
her,  were  it  never  so  particular,  yet  was  it  under  the  con- 
ditions before  expressed. 

;fp,  I  bade  her  mark  that. 

Sect.  35.  23,  I. — This  answer  (I  am  sure)  troubles  not  you.  But 
it  seems  you  would  fain  have  it  lay  a  load  of  envy  upon  me, 
that  you  profess  you  bade  the  lady  so  carefully  mark  that. 
Well,  you  bade  her  mark  that ;  for  what  ?  for  some  great 
matter,  or  for  some  new  ?  Not  for  some  new  sure :  for  the 
protestants  have  ever  been  ready  for  truth  and  in  charity  to 
grant  as  much  as  might  be ;  and  therefore  from  the  begin- 
ning many  !  learned  men  granted  this.  So  that  you  needed 

k  Cave  ne  dum  vis  alium  notare  citante  Bellarmino,  de  Notis  Eccles.  lib. 

culpae,  ipse  noteris  calumniae.  S.  Hier.  iv.  c.  16.  §.  penult.  Et  Field.  Appen- 

advers.  Pelagianos,  lib.  iii.  dice,  par.  3.  c.  2.  Et  Jos.  Hall  bishop 

1  Nos  fatemur  sub  papatu  plun'mum  of  Exeter,  lib.  Of  the  Old  Religion,  c.  i. 

esse  boni,  imo  omne  bonum  Chris-  "  Many  holding  Christ  the  foundation 

tianum,  atque  etiam  illinc  ad  nos  deve-  aright,  and  groaning  under  the  burden 

nisse,  &c.  Luther  contra  Anabaptist,  of  popish  trash,  &c.  by  a  general  re- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


not  have  put  such  a  serious  "  mark  that"  upon  my  speech,  Sect.  35. 
as  if  none  before  had,  or  none  but  I  would  speak  it.  And  if 
your  "  mark  that"  were  not  for  some  new  matter,  was  it  for 
some  great  ?  Yes  sure,  it  was ;  for  what  greater  than  sal- 
vation? But  then,  I  pray,  mark  this  too,  that  "  might  be 
saved"  grants  but  a  m possibility,  no  sure  or  safe  way  to  sal- 
vation. The  possibility  I  think  cannot  be  denied,  the  igno- 
rant's  especially,  because  they  hold  the  foundation,  and  cannot 
survey  the  building  ;  and  the  foundation  can  deceive  no  man 
that  rests  upon  it :  but  a  secure  way  they  cannot  go  that  hold 
with  such  corruptions  when  they  know  them.  Now  whether 
it  be  wisdom,  in  such  a  point  as  salvation  is,  to  forsake  a 
church  in  the  which  the  ground  of  salvation  is  firm,  to  follow 
a  church  in  which  it  is  but  possible  one  may  be  saved,  but 
very  probable  he  may  do  worse,  if  he  look  not  well  to  the 
foundation,  judge  ye.  I  am  sure  nSt.  Augustine  thought 
it  was  not,  and  judged  it  a  great  sin,  in  point  of  salvation, 

pentance,  and  assured  faith  in  their 
Saviour,  did  find  favour  with  the  Lord." 
D.  Geo.  Abbot,  late  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, Answer  to  Hill,  ad  Ration. 
I.  §.  30. 

"  For  my  part  I  dare  not  deny  the 
possibility  of  their  salvation,  who  have 
been  the  chiefest  instruments  of  ours, 
&c."  Hooker,  in  his  Discourse  of  Jus- 
tificat.  §.  1 7.  "  In  former  times  a  man 
might  hold  the  general  doctrine  of  those 
churches  wherein  our  Fathers  lived, 
and  be  saved ;  and  yet  since  the  coun- 
cil of  Trent,  some  are  found  in  it  in 
such  degree  of  orthodoxy,  as  we  may 
well  hope  of  their  salvation."  Field.  Ec- 
cles.  lib.  iii.  c.  47. 

"  The  Latin  or  western  church,  sub- 
ject to  the  Romish  tyranny,  was  a  true 
church,  in  which  a  saving  profession 
of  the  truth  of  Christ  was  found."  Jos. 
Hall  bishop  of  Exeter,  lib.  Of  the  Old 
Religion,  fine,  in  his  advertisement  to 
the  reader,  p.  202. 

Non  pauci  retinuerunt  Christum  fun- 
damentum,  &c.  Mornaeus,  Tract,  de 
Ecclesia,  c.  9.  fine. — Inter  sordes  istas, 
ista  quae  summo  cum  periculo  expec- 
tetur  salus,  non  ipsorum  additamentis, 
sed  iis,  quae  nobiscum  habent  commu- 
nia,  fundamentis  est  attribuenda.  Jo. 
Prideaux,  Lectione  9.  fine.  — Papa  ali- 
quam  adhuc  religionis  formam  relin- 
quit,  spem  vitse  aeternae  non  tollit,  &c. 

Calv.  Instruct,  advers.  Libertinos,  c.  4. 

m  Here  A.  C.  gets  another  snatch, 
and  tells  us,  "  That  to  grant  a  possi- 
bility of  salvation  in  the  Roman  church, 
is  the  free  confession  of  an  adversary, 
and  therefore  is  of  force  against  us,  and 
extorted  by  truth  :  but  to  say  that  sal- 
vation is  more  securely  and  easily  to 
be  had  in  the  protestant  faith,  that  is 
but  their  partial  opinion  in  their  own 
behalf,  and  of  no  force,  especially  with 
Roman  catholics."  I  easily  believe  this 
latter  part,  that  this,  as  A.  C.  and  the 
rest  use  the  matter  with  their  prose- 
lytes, shall  be  of  little  or  no  force  with 
Roman  catholics.  But  it  will  behove 
them  that  it  be  of  force  :  for  let  any 
indifferent  man  weigh  the  necessary  re- 
quisites to  salvation,  and  he  shall  find 
this  no  partial  opinion,  but  very  plain 
and  real  verity,  that  the  protestant, 
living  according  to  his  belief,  is  upon 
the  safer  way  to  heaven.  And  as  for 
my  confession,  let  them  enforce  it  as 
far  as  they  can  against  me,  so  they 
observe  my  limitations ;  which  if  they 
do,  A.  C.  and  his  fellows  will  (of  all 
the  rest)  have  but  little  comfort  in  such 
a  limited  possibility. 

11  De  Bapt.  cont.  Don.  lib.  i.  c.  3. 
Graviter  peccarent  in  rebus  ad  salutem 
animae  pertinentibus,  &c.  eo  solo  quod 
certis  incerta  prseponerent. 

238  Archbishop  Laud  against 


Sect.  35.  for  s,  man  to  prefer  incerta  certis,  uncertainties  and  naked 
possibilities  before  an  evident  and  certain  course.  And  °Bel- 
larmine  is  of  opinion,  and  that  in  the  point  of  justification, 
"  that  in  regard  of  the  uncertainty  of  our  own  righteous- 
ness, and  of  the  danger  of  vainglory,  tutissimum  est,  it  is 
safest  to  repose  our  whole  trust  in  the  mercy  and  goodness 
of  God."  And  surely,  if  there  be  one  safer  way  than  another, 
as  he  confesses  there  is,  he  is  no  wise  man,  that  in  a  matter 
of  so  great  moment  will  not  betake  himself  to  the  safest  way. 
And  therefore  even  you  yourselves  in  the  point  of  condignity 
of  merit,  though  you  write  it  and  preach  it  boisterously  to 
the  people,  yet  you  are  content  to  die,  renouncing  the  con- 
dignity  of  all  your  own  merits,  and  trust  to  Chrises.  Now 
surely,  if  you  will  not  venture  to  die  as  you  live,  live  and 
believe  in  time  as  you  mean  to  die. 

II. — And  one  thing  more,  because  you  bid  mark  this,  let 
me  remember  to  tell  you  for  the  benefit  of  others.  Upon 
this  very  point — "  that  we  acknowledge  an  honest  ignorant 
papist  may  be  saved" — you  and  your  like  work  upon  the 
advantage  of  our  charity  and  your  own  want  of  it  to  abuse 
the  weak.  For  thus  I  am  told  you  work  upon  them  :  "  You 
see  the  protestants  (at  least  many  of  them)  confess  there 
may  be  salvation  in  our  church;  we  absolutely  deny  there 
is  salvation  in  theirs :  therefore  it  is  safer  to  come  to  ours 
than  to  stay  in  theifs ;  to  be  where  almost  all  grant  salva- 
tion, than  where  the  greater  part  of  the  world  deny  it." 
This  argument  is  very  prevailing  with  men  that  cannot  weigh 
it,  and  with  women  especially  that  are  put  in  fear  by  P  violent 
(though  causeless)  denying  heaven  unto  them.  And  some 
of  your  party  since  this  have  set  out  a  book  called  "  Charity 
mistaken  ;"  but  beside  the  answer  fully  given  to  it,  this  alone 
is  sufficient  to  confute  it.  First,  that  in  this  our  charity 
(whatever  yours  be)  is  not  mistaken,  unless  the  charity  of 

o  Propter  incertitudinem  proprise  time.  Quosdam  scimus,  &c.  ad  iracun- 

justitiae,  et  periculum  inanis  gloriae,  diam  suarn  evangelium  pertrahentes, 

tutissimum  est  nduciam  totam  in  sola  &c.  quibus  si  potestas  ea  obtigisset  ut 

Dei  misericordia  et  benignitate  repo-  nonnullos  gehennae  traderent,  orbem 

nere.  Bellarm.  de  Justif.  lib.  v.  c.  7.  §.  quoque uni versum  consumpsissent.  Just. 

Sit  tertia  propositio.  Martyr.  Epist.  ad  Zenam  et  Serenum. 

P  And  this  piece  of  cunning  to  affright  And  here  it  is,  ad  iracundiam  suam 

the  weak  was  in  use  in  Justin  Martyr's  ecclesiam  pertrahentes,  &c. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  239 

the  church  herself  were  mistaken  in  the  case  of  the  Donatists,  Sect.  35. 
as  shall  Rafter  appear.  Secondly,  even  mistaken  charity  (if 
such  it  were)  is  far  better  than  none  at  all.  And  if  the 
mistaken  be  ours,  the  none  is  yours.  Yea,  but  A.  0.  tells  A.  C.  p.  56. 
us,  "  That  this  denial  of  salvation  is  grounded  upon  charity, 
as  were  the  like  threats  of  Christ  and  the  holy  Fathers.  For 
there  is  but  one  true  faith,  and  one  true  church,  and  out  of 
that  there  is  no  salvation ;  and  he  that  will  not  hear  the  church, 
let  him  le  as  a  heathen  and  a  publican1 :  therefore  he  says,  it 
is  more  charity  to  forewarn  us  of  the  danger  by  these  threats, 
than  to  let  us  run  into  it  through  a  false  security."  It  is 
true  that  there  is  but  one  true  faith,  and  but  one  true 
church;  but  that  one,  both  faith  and  church,  is  the  s catholic 
Christian,  not  the  particular  Roman.  And  this  catholic  Chris- 
tian church,  he  that  will  not  both  hear  and  obey,  yea,  and 
the  particular  church  in  which  he  lives  too,  so  far  as  it  in 
necessaries  agrees  with  the  universal,  is  in  as  bad  condition 
as  a  heathen  and  a  publican,  and  perhaps  in  some  respects 
worse ;  and  were  we  in  this  case,  we  should  thank  A.  C.  for 
giving  us  warning  of  our  danger.  But  it  is  not  so :  for  he 
thunders  out  all  these  threats  and  denial  of  salvation,  because 
we  join  not  with  the  Roman  church  in  all  things,  as  if  her 
corruptions  were  part  of  the  catholic  faith  of  Christ.  So  the 
whole  passage  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question,  and  then 
threatening  upon  it,  without  all  ground  of  reason  or  charity. 
In  the  mean  time  let  A.  C.  look  to  himself,  that  in  his  false 
security  he  run  not  into  the  danger  and  loss  of  his  own 
salvation,  while  he  would  seem  to  take  such  care  of  ours. 
But  though  this  argument  prevails  with  the  weak,  yet  it  is 
much  stronger  in  the  cunning  than  the  true  force  of  it :  for 
all  arguments  are  very  moving,  that  lay  their  ground  upon 
Hhe  adversaries'  confession,  especially  if  it  be  confessed  and 
avouched  to  be  true.  But  if  you  would  speak  truly,  and  say, 

q  Sect.  35.  num.  III.  its  qualities  and  conditions :  if  you  leave 

r  Matt,  xviii.  17.  out  or   change   these,  you  wrong  the 

s  And  this  is  proved  by  the  Creed,  confession,  and  then  it  is  of  no  force; 

in  which  we  profess  our  belief  of  the  and  so  doth  A.  C.  here.     And  though 

catholic,  not  of  the  Roman  church.  Bellarmine  makes  the  confession  of  the 

t  "  This  is  a  free  confession  of  the  adversary  a  note  of  the  true  church,  de 

adversaries'    argument    against    them-  NotisEccles.  lib.  iv.  c.  16,  yet  in  the  very 

selves,  and  therefore  is  of  force."  A.  C.  beginning,  where  he  lays  his  ground, 

p.  64.     But  every  confession  of  adver-  §.  i.  he  lays  it  in  a  plain  fallacy  a  secun- 

saries  or   others   is  to  be   taken  with  dum  quid  ad  sirnpliciter. 

240  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  Many  protestants  indeed  confess  there  is  salvation  possible 
to  be  attained  in  the  Roman  church ;  but  they  say  withal 
that  the  errors  of  that  church  are  so  many  (uand  some  so 
great  as  weaken  the  foundation)  that  it  is  very  hard  to  go 
that  way  to  heaven,  especially  to  them  that  have  had  the 
truth  manifested ;  the  heart  of  this  argument  were  utterly 
broken.  Besides,  the  force  of  this  argument  lies  upon  two 
things,  one  directly  expressed,  the  other  but  as  upon  the  by. 

III. — That  which  is  expressed  is,  We  and  our  adversaries 
consent  that  there  is  salvation  to  some  in  the  Roman  church. 
What !  would  you  have  us  as  malicious  (at  least  as  rash)  as 
yourselves  are  to  us,  and  deny  you  so  much  as  possibility  of 
salvation  ?  If  we  should,  we  might  make  you  in  some  things 
strain  for  a  proof.  But  we  have  not  so  learned  Christ,  as 
either  to  return  evil  for  evil  in  this  heady  course,  or  to  deny 
salvation  to  some  ignorant  silly  souls,  whose  humble,  peace- 
able obedience  makes  them  safe  among  any  part  of  men  that 
profess  the  foundation,  Christ :  and  therefore  seek  not  to  help 
our  cause  by  denying  this  comfort  to  silly  Christians,  as  you 
most  fiercely  do  where  you  can  come  to  work  upon  them. 
And  this  was  an  old  trick  of  the  Donatists ;  for  in  the  point 
of  baptism,  (whether  that  sacrament  was  true  in  the  catholic 
church  or  in  the  part  of  Donatus,)  they  exhorted  all  to  be 
baptized  among  them.  Why?  Because  both  parts  granted 
that  baptism  was  true  among  the  Donatists ;  which  that 
peevish  sect  most  unjustly  denied  the  sound  part,  as  xSt. 
Augustine  delivers  it.  I  would  ask  now,  Had  not  the  ortho- 
dox true  baptism  among  them,  because  the  Donatists  denied 
it  injuriously  ?  Or  should  the  orthodox  against  truth  have 
denied  baptism  among  the  Donatists,  either  to  cry  quittance 
with  them,  or  that  their  argument  might  not  be  the  stronger 
because  both  parts  granted  ?  But  mark  this,  how  far  you  run 

u  For  they  are  no  mean  differences  much,  if  not  more  than  Bellarmine. 
that  are  between  us,  by  Bellarmine's  "  Thus  we  catholics  hold  all  points,  in 
own  confession.  Agendum  est  non  de  which  protestants  differ  from  us  in  doc- 
rebus  levibus,  sed  de  gravissimis  quaes-  trine  of  faith,  to  be  fundamental  and 
tionibus  quae  ad  ipsa  fidei  fundamenta  necessary  to  be  believed,  or  at  least  not 
pertinent,  &c.  Bellarm.  in  praefat.  denied."  A.  C.  Relation  of  the  first 
operibus  praefixa,  §.  3.  And  therefore  Conference,  p.  28. 

the  errors  in  them  and  the  corruptions         x  Esse  vero  apud  Donatistas  baptis- 

of  them  cannot  be  of  small  consequence,  mum,  et  illi  asserunt,  et  nos  concedi- 

by  your  own  confession.    Yes,  by  your  mus,  &c.  De  Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  lib.  i. 

own  indeed  :  for  you  A.  C.  say  full  as  c.  3. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  241 

from  all  common  principles  of  Christian  peace,  as  well  as  Sect.  35. 
Christian  truth,  while  you  deny  salvation  most  unjustly  to  us, 
from  which  you  are  further  off  yourselves.  Besides,  if  this 
were  or  could  be  made  a  concluding  argument,  I  pray,  why 
do  not  you  believe  with  us  in  the  point  of  the  eucharist  ? 
for  all  sides  agree  in  the  faith  of  the  church  of  England, 
that  in  the  most  blessed  sacrament  the  worthy  receiver  is 
by  his  Y  faith  made  spiritually  partaker  of  the  true  and  real 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  z  truly,  and  really,  and  of  all  the 
benefits  of  his  passion.  Your  Roman  catholics  add  a  manner 
of  this  his  presence,  transubstantiation,  which  many  deny ;  and 
the  Lutherans  a  manner  of  this  presence,  consubstantiation, 
which  more  deny.  If  the  argument  be  good,  then  even  for 
this  consent,  it  is  safer  communicating  with  the  church  of 
England  than  with  the  Roman  or  Lutheran,  because  all  agree 
in  this  truth,  not  in  any  other  opinion.  Nay,  aSuarez  himself, 
and  he  a  very  learned  adversary,  (what  say  you  to  this,  A.  C.  ?  A.  C.  p.  64, 
doth  truth  force  this  from  him  ?)  confesses  plainly,  "  That  to  6s* 
believe  transubstantiation  is  not  simply  necessary  to  salvation ;" 
and  yet  he  knew  well  the  church  had  determined  it.  And 
bBellarmine,  after  an  intricate,  tedious,  and  almost  inexpli- 
cable discourse  about  an  adductive  conversion,  (a  thing  which 
neither  divinity  nor  philosophy  ever  heard  of  till  then,)  is  at 
last  forced  to  come  to  this:  "  c Whatsoever  is  concerning  the 

y    Corpus    Christi    manducatur    in  the  words  truly  and  really.     For  that 

crena,  &c.  tantum  cnelesti  et  spiritual!  blessed  sacrament,  received  as  it  ought 

ratione  :    medium    autem    quo    corpus  to  be,  doth  truly  and  really  exhibit  and 

Christi  accipitur  et  manducatur  in  coena,  apply  the  body  and  the  blood  of  Christ 

fides  est.    Eccl.  Angl.  Art.  XXVIII to  the  receiver.    So  bishop  White  in 

"  After  a  spiritual  manner  by  faith  on  our  his  defence  against  T.  W.  P.  edit. 
l»ehalf,  and  by  the  working  of  the  Holy  London,  1617.  p.  138.  And  Calvin  in 
Ghost  on  the  behalf  of  Christ."  Fulk.  in  i  Cor.  x.  3.  Vere  datur,  &c.  And 
I  Cor.  xi.  p.  528. — Christus  seipsum  again  in  i  Cor.  xi.  24.  Neque  enim 
omnibus  bonis  suis  in  ccena  offert,  et  mortis  tantum  et  resurrectionis  suae  be- 
nos  eum  recipimus  fide,  &c.  Calv.  Instit.  neficium  nobis  offert  Christus,  sed  cor- 
iv.  c.  17.  §•  5-  Et  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  pus  ipsum  in  quo  passus  est,  et  re- 
fa,  v.  c.  67.  §.  6.  surrexit.  Concludo  realiter  (ut  vulgo 

And  say  not  you  the  same  with  us  ?  loquuntur),  hoc  est,  vere  nobis  in  crena 

Spiritualis  manducatio,  quae  per  animam  datur  Christi  corpus,  ut  sit  anirnis  nos- 

fit,   ad   Christi   carnem   in  sacramento  tris  in  ciburn  salutarem,  &c. 
pertingit.    Cajet.  torn.  ii.  Opusc.  de  Eu-         a  Hoc   totum    pendet    ex    principiis 

char.  Tract.  2.  cap.  5. — Sed  spiritualiter,  metaphysicis  et  philosophicis,  et  ad  fidei 

id    est,    invisibiliter,    et    per   virtutem  doctrinam  non  est  necessarium.    Suarez 

Spiritus   Sancti.     Thorn,   p.  3.   q.    75.  in  3.  torn.  Disput.  50.  §.  2. 
A.  i.  ad  i. — Spiritualiter  manducandus         l>  Bellarm.  de  Euchar.  lib.  iii.  c.  18. 

est  per  fidem  et  charitatem.     Tena.  in  §.  Ex  his  colligimus. 
Heb.  xiii.  difficultate  8.  c  Sed  quid-quid  sit  de  modis  loquendi, 

z  I  would  have  no  man  troubled  at  illud  tenendum  est,  conversionem  panis 

Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  3  5.  manner  and  forms  of  speech,  illud  tenendwm  est,  this  is  to  be 
held,  that  the  conversion  of  the  bread  and  wine  into  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  is  substantial,  but  after  a  secret  and 
ineffable  manner,  and  not  like  in  all  things  to  any  natural 
conversion  whatsoever.*"  Now  if  he  had  left  out  "  conversion,*" 
and  affirmed  only  Christ's  real  presence  there  after  a  myste- 
rious and  indeed  an  ineffable  manner,  no  man  could  have 
spoke  better.  And  therefore,  if  you  will  force  the  argument 
always  to  make  that  the  safest  way  of  salvation  which  differ- 
ing parties  agree  on,  why  do  you  not  yield  to  the  force  of 
the  same  argument  in  the  belief  of  the  sacrament,  one  of  the 
most  immediate  means  of  salvation,  where  not  only  the  most 
but  all  agree,  and  your  own  greatest  clerks  cannot  tell  what 
to  say  to  the  contrary  ? 

IV. — I  speak  here  for  the  force  of  the  argument,  which 
A.  C.  p.  64.  certainly  in  itself  is  nothing,  though  by  A.  C.  made  of  great 
account ;  for  he  says,  "It  is  a  confession  of  adversaries 
extorted  by  truth ;"  just  as  d  Petilian  the  Donatist  bragged  in 
the  case  of  baptism.  But  in  truth  it  is  nothing ;  for  the 
syllogism  which  it  frames  is  this :  In  point  of  faith  and 
salvation  it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  take  that  way  which  the 
differing  parties  agree  on.  But  papists  and  protestants  (which 
are  the  differing  parties)  agree  in  this,  that  there  is  salvation 
possible  to  be  found  in  the  Roman  church :  therefore  it  is 
safest  for  a  man  to  be  and  continue  in  the  Roman  church. 
To  the  minor  proposition  then,  I  observe  this  only,  that 
though  many  learned  protestants  grant  this,  all  do  not.  And 
then  that  proposition  is  not  universally  true,  nor  able  to 
sustain  the  conclusion :  for  they  do  not  in  this  all  agree ; 
nay,  I  doubt  not  but  there  are  some  protestants  which  can 
and  do  as  stiffly  and  as  churlishly  deny  them  salvation  as 
they  do  us :  and  A.  C.  should  do  well  to  consider,  whether 
they  do  it  not  upon  as  good  reason  at  least.  But  for  the 
major  proposition,  namely,  That  in  point  of  faith  and  sal- 

et  vini  in  corpus  et  sanguinem  Christi  arbitramini,  ut  ad  hoc  tibi  terminan- 

esse  substantialem,  sed  arcanam  et  in-  dam  putares  epistolam  quo  quasi  recen- 

effabilem,  et  millis  naturaiibus  conver-  tins  in  animis  legentium  remaneret,  bre- 

sionibus  per  orania  similem,  &c.  Bellarm.  viter  respondeo,  &c.     S.  August,  cont. 

in  Recognit.  hujus  loci.  Et  vid.  Sect.  38.  Lit.   Petil.  lib.   ii.  c.  108.     And  here 

num.  III.  A.  C.  ad  hoc  sibi  putavit  terminandam 

<1  Sed  quia  ita  magnum  firmamentum  collationem  ;  sed  frustra,  ut  apparebit, 

vanitatis  vestrse  in  hac  sententia  esse  num.  VI. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit,  243 

vation  it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  take  that  way  which  the  Sect.  35. 
adversary  confesses,  or  the  differing  parties  agree  on,  I  say 
that  is  no  metaphysical  principle,  but  a  bare  contingent  pro- 
position, and  being  indefinitely  taken,  may  be  true  or  false, 
as  the  matter  is  to  which  it  is  applied;  but  being  taken 
universally  is  false,  and  not  able  to  lead  in  the  conclusion. 
Now  that  this  proposition — In  point  of  faith  and  salvation 
it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  take  that  way  which  the  differing 
parties  agree  on,  or  which  the  adversary  confesses — hath  no 
strength  in  itself,  but  is  sometimes  true  and  sometimes  false, 
as  the  matter  is  about  which  it  is  conversant,  is  most  evident. 
First,  by  reason :  because  consent  of  disagreeing  parties  is 
neither  rule  nor  proof  of  truth  ;  for  Herod  and  Pilate,  dis- 
agreeing parties  enough,  yet  agreed  against  truth  itself:  but 
truth  rather  is  or  should  be  the  rule  to  frame,  if  not  to  force 
agreement.  And  secondly,  by  the  two  instances  e  before  given : 
for  in  the  instance  between  the  orthodox  church  then  and 
the  Donatists  this  proposition  is  most  false;  for  it  was  a 
point  of  faith,  and  so  of  salvation,  that  they  were  upon, 
namely,  the  right  use  and  administration  of  the  sacrament 
of  baptism.  And  yet,  had  it  been  safest  to  take  up  that 
way  which  the  differing  parts  agreed  on,  or  which  the 
adverse  part  confessed,  men  must  needs  have  gone  with  the 
Donatists  against  the  church.  And  this  must  fall  out  as 
oft  as  any  heretic  will  cunningly  take  that  way  against  the 
church  which  the  Donatists  did,  if  this  principle  shall  go  for 
current.  But  in  the  second  instance,  concerning  the  eucha- 
rist,  a  matter  of  faith,  and  so  of  salvation  too,  the  same  pro- 
position is  most  true.  And  the  reason  is,  because  here  the 
matter  is  true ;  namely,  the  true  and  real  participation  of 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  in  that  blessed  sacrament.  But 
in  the  former  the  matter  was  false  ;  namely,  that  rebaptiza- 
tion  was  necessary  for  baptism  formally  given  by  the  church. 
So  this  proposition — In  point  of  faith  and  salvation  it  is 
safest  for  a  man  to  take  that  way  which  the  differing  parties 
agree  in,  or  which  the  adversary  confesses — is,  you  see,  both 
true  and  false,  as  men  have  cunning  to  apply  it,  and  as 
the  matter  is  about  which  it  is  conversant :  and  is  therefore 
no  proposition  able  or  fit  to  settle  a  conclusion  in  any  sober 

e  Sect.  35.  num.  III. 
R  2, 

244  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  man's  mind,  till  the  matter  contained  under  it  be  well  scanned 
and  examined  ?  And  yet,  as  much  use  as  you  would  make  of 
this  proposition  to  amaze  the  weak,  yourselves  dare  not  stand 
to  it ;  no,  not  where  the  matter  is  undeniably  true,  as  shall 
appear  in  divers  particulars  beside  this  of  the  eucharist. 

A.C.p.65.  V- — But  before  I  add  any  other  particular  instances,  I 
must  tell  you  what  A.  C.  says  to  the  two  former :  for  he  tells 
us,  "  These  two  are  nothing  like  the  present  case.11  Nothing  ! 
that  is  strange  indeed.  Why,  in  the  first  of  those  cases  con- 
cerning the  Donatists  your  proposition  is  false;  and  so  far 
from  being  safest,  that  it  was  no  way  safe  for  a  man  to  take 
that  way  of  belief,  and  so  of  salvation,  which  both  parts 
agreed  on.  And  is  this  nothing?  nay,  is  not  this  full  and 
home  to  the  present  case  ?  For  the  present  case  is  this,  and 
no  more,  That  it  is  safest  taking  that  way  of  belief  which 
the  differing  parties  agree  on,  or  which  the  adversary  con- 
fesses. And  in  the  second  of  those  cases  concerning  the 
eucharist,  your  proposition  indeed  is  true ;  not  by  the  truth 
which  it  hath  in  itself  metaphysically  and  in  abstract,  but 
only  in  regard  of  the  matter  to  which  it  is  applied:  yet 
there  you  desert  your  own  proposition  where  it  is  true.  And 
is  this  nothing  ?  nay,  is  not  this  also  full  and  home  to  the 
present  case,  since  it  appears  your  proposition  is  such  as  your- 
selves dare  not  bide  by,  either  when  it  is  true  or  when  it  is 
false  ?  For  in  the  case  of  baptism  administered  by  the  Donatist, 
the  proposition  is  false,  and  you  dare  not  bide  by  it  for  truth's 
sake.  And  in  the  case  of  the  eucharist  the  proposition  is 
true,  and  yet  you  dare  not  bide  by  it  for  the  church  of  Rome's 
sake.  So  that  church  (with  you)  cannot  err,  and  yet  will  not 
suffer  you  to  maintain  truth  ;  which  not  to  do  is  some  degree 
of  error,  and  that  no  small  one. 

A.  C.  p.  65.  VI. — Well,  A.  C.  goes  on,  and  gives  his  reasons  why  these 
two  instances  are  nothing  like  the  present  case.  "  For  in 
these  cases,"  saith  he,  "  there  are  annexed  other  reasons  of  cer- 
tainly known  peril  of  damnable  schism  and  heresy,  which  we 
should  incur  by  consenting  to  the  Donatists'  denial  of  true 
baptism  among  catholics,  and  to  the  protestants'  denial  or 
doubting  of  the  true  substantial  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
eucharist ;  but  in  this  case  of  resolving  to  live  and  die  in  the 
catholic  Roman  church,  there  is  confessedly  no  such  peril  of 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  245 

any  damnable  heresy  or  schism,  or  any  other  sin."     Here  I  Sect.  35. 
have  many  particulars  to  observe  upon  A.  C.,  and  you  shall 
have  them  as  briefly  as  I  can  set  them  down. 

And  first,  I  take  A.  C.  at  his  word,  that  in  the  case  of  the  Punct.  i. 
Donatists,  should  it  be  followed,  there  would  be  known  peril 
of  damnable  schism  and  heresy  by  denying  true  baptism  to  be 
in  the  orthodox  church.  For  by  this  you  may  see  what  a  sound 
proposition  this  is,  That  where  two  parties  are  dissenting,  it 
is  safest  believing  that  in  which  both  parties  agree,  or  which 
the  adversary  confesses  ;  for  here  you  may  see  by  the  case 
of  the  Donatist  is  confessed,  it  may  lead  a  man  that  will 
universally  lean  to  it  into  known  and  damnable  schism  and 
heresy.  An  excellent  guide,  I  promise  you,  this ;  is  it  not  I 

Nor,  secondly,  are  these,  though  A.  C.  calls  them  so,  an-  Punct.  2. 
nexed  reasons  ;  for  he  calls  them  so  but  to  blanch  the  mat-  A*  p*  5* 
ter,  as  if  they  fell  upon  the  proposition  ab  extra,  accidentally, 
and  from  without ;  whereas  they  are  not  annexed  or  pinned 
on,  but  flow  naturally  out  of  the  proposition  itself.  For 
the  proposition  would  seem  to  be  metaphysical,  and  is  applia- 
ble  indifferently  to  any  common  belief  of  dissenting  parties, 
be  the  point  in  difference  what  it  will.  Therefore  if  there  be 
any  thing  heretical,  schismatical,  or  any  way  evil  in  the  point, 
this  proposition,  being  neither  universally  nor  necessarily  true, 
must  needs  cast  him  that  relies  upon  it  upon  all  these  rocks 
of  heresy,  schism,  or  whatever  else  follows  the  matter  of  the 

Thirdly,  A.  0.  doth  extremely  ill  to  join  these  cases  of  the  Punct.  3. 
Donatists  for  baptism  and  the  protestants  for  the  eucharist At  C' p* 66> 
together,  as  he  doth.     For  this  proposition  in  the  first,  con- 
cerning the  Donatists,  leads  a  man  (as  is  confessed  by  him- 
self) into  known  and  damnable  schism  and  heresy ;  but,  by 
A.  O.'s  good  leave,  the  latter,  concerning  the  protestants  and 
the  eucharist,  nothing  so.     For  I  hope  A.  C.  dare  not  say, 
that  to  believe  the  true,  f  substantial  presence   of  Christ  is 
either  known  or  damnable  schism  or  heresy.     Now  as  many 

f  Caeterum  his  absurditatibus  subla-  Inst.  lib.  iv.  c.   17.   §.    19. — In  coenae 

tis,    quicquid    ad   exprimendam    veram  mysterio    per    symbola    panis   et    vini 

substaiitialemque  corporis  ac  sanguinis  Christus  vere  nobis  exhibetur,  &c.     Et 

Domini  communicationem,  quae  sub  sa-  nos  participes  substantise  ejus  facti  su- 

cris  ccenae  symbolis,  fidelibus  exhibetur,  mus.    Ibid.  §.  u. 
facere    potest,    libenter  recipio.     Calv. 

R   2 

246  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  and  as  learned  gprotestants  believe  and  maintain  this,  as  do 
believe  possibility  of  salvation  (as  before  is  limited)  in  the 
Roman  church  :  therefore  they,  in  that,  not  guilty  of  either 
known  or  damnable  schism  or  heresy,  though  the  Donatists 
were  of  both. 
Punct.  4.  Fourthly,  whereas  he  imposes  upon  the  protestants  "  the 

A.  C.  p.  66.  jgjjjgj  or  doubting  of  the  true  and  real  presence  of  Christ  in 
the  eucharist,"  he  is  a  great  deal  more  bold  than  true  in 
that  also ;  for  understand  them  right,  and  they  certainly  nei- 
ther deny  nor  doubt  it.  For  as  for  the  Lutherans,  as  they  are 
commonly  called,  their  very  opinion  of  consubstantiation 
makes  it  known  to  the  world,  that  they  neither  deny  nor 
doubt  of  his  true  and  real  presence  there ;  and  they  are  pro- 
testants. And  for  the  Calvinists,  if  they  might  be  rightly 
understood,  they  also  maintain  a  most  true  and  real  presence, 
though  they  cannot  permit  their  judgment  to  be  transubstan- 
tiated ;  and  they  are  protestants  too.  And  this  is  so  known 
a  truth  that  hBellarmine  confesses  it;  for  he  saith,  "  Pro- 
testants do  often  grant  that  the  true  and  real  body  of  Christ 
is  in  the  eucharist."  But  he  adds,  "  That  they  never  say  (so 
far  as  he  hath  read)  that  it  is  there  truly  and  really,  unless 
they  speak  of  the  supper  which  shall  be  in  heaven."  Well ; 
first,  if  they  grant  that  the  true  and  real  body  of  Christ  is  in 
that  blessed  sacrament,  (as  Bellarmine  confesses  they  do,  and 

A.  C.  p.  65,  it  is  most  true,)  then  A.  C.  is  false,  who  charges  all  the  pro- 
testants with  denial  or  doubtfulness  in  this  point.  And 
secondly,  Bellarmine  himself  also  shews  here  his  ignorance  or 
his  malice ;  ignorance,  if  he  knew  it  not,  malice,  if  he  would 
not  know  it.  For  the  Calvinists,  at  least  they  which  follow 
Calvin  himself,  do  not  only  believe  that  the  true  and  real 
body  of  Christ  is  received  in  the  eucharist,  but  that  it  is 
there,  and  that  we  partake  of  it  vere  et  realiter,  which  are 
i  Calvin's  own  words ;  and  yet  Bellarmine  boldly  affirms  that 
to  his  reading  "  no  one  protestant  did  ever  affirm  it.11  And 

S  Sect.  35.  num.  III.  ants  under  the  name  of  sacramentarii 

h  Bellarm.  de  Euchar.  lib.  i.  c.  2.  is  plain.  For  he  says  the  council  of 

§.    Quinto   dicit.     Sacramentarii   saepe  Trent  opposed  this  word  realiter,  fig- 

dicunt  reale  corpus  Christi  in  coena  ad-  mento  Calvinistico,  to  the   Cavinistical 

esse,  sed  realiter  adesse  nunquam    di-  figment.    Ibid. 

cunt,  quod  legerim,  nisi  forte  loquun-  i  Calv.  in  i  Cor.  x.  3.  vere,  &c.  et  in. 

tur  de  crena  quae  fit  in  ccelo,  &c.  i  Cor.  xi.  24.  realiter.  Vide  supra 

And  that  he  means  to  brand  protest-  num.  III. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  247 

I  for  my  part  cannot  believe  but  Bellarmine  had  read  Cal-  Sect.  35. 
vin,  and  very  carefully,  he  doth  so  frequently  and  so  mainly 
oppose  him.  Nor  can  that  place  by  any  art  be  shifted,  or  by 
any  violence  wrested  from  Calvin's  true  meaning  of  the  pre- 
sence of  Christ  in  and  at  the  blessed  sacrament  of  the  eucha- 
rist,  to  any  supper  in  heaven  whatsoever.  But  most  manifest  it 
is,  that  quod  legerim,  "  for  aught  I  have  read,1'  will  never  serve 
Bellarmine  to  excuse  him:  for  he  himself,  but  in  the  very 
k  chapter  going  before,  quotes  four  places  out  of  Calvin,  in 
which  he  says  expressly,  that  we  receive  in  the  sacrament  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  vere,  truly.  So  Calvin  says  it  four 
times,  and  Bellarmine  quotes  the  places ;  and  yet  he  says  in 
the  very  next  chapter,  that  never  any  protestant  said  so,  to 
his  reading.  And  for  the  church  of  England,  nothing  is  more 
plain  than  that  it  believes  and  teaches  the  true  and  real  pre- 
sence of  Christ  in  the  ^  eucharist,  unless  A.  C.  can  make  a 
body  no  body,  and  blood  no  blood,  (as  perhaps  he  can  by 
transubstantiation,)  as  well  as  bread  no  bread,  and  wine  no 
wine  :  and  the  church  of  England  is  protestant  too.  So  pro- 
testants  of  all  sorts  maintain  a  true  and  real  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  eucharist ;  and  then,  where  is  any  known  or 
damnable  heresy  here  ?  As  for  the  learned  of  those  zealous 
men  that  died  in  this  cause  in  queen  Mary's  days,  they  denied 
not  the  real  presence  simply  taken,  but  as  their  opposites 
forced  transubstantiation  upon  them,  as  if  that  and  the  real 
presence  had  been  all  one.  Whereas  all  the  ancient  Chris- 
tians ever  believed  the  one,  and  none  but  modern  and  super- 
stitious Christians  believe  the  other,  if  they  do  believe  it ;  for 
I  doubt,  for  my  part,  they  do  not.  And  as  for  the  unlearned 
in  those  times,  and  all  times,  their  zeal  (they  holding  the 
foundation)  may  eat  out  their  ignorances  and  leave  them  safe. 
Now  that  the  learned  protestants  in  queen  Mary's  days  did 

k  Bellarm.  de  Eucharistia,  lib.  i.  c.  I.  secration  thus  :  "  Grant  us,  gracious 

§.  Secundo  docet.  Lord,  so  to  eat  the  flesh  of  thy  dear  Sou 

1  "The  body  of  Christ  is  given,  taken,  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  drink  his  blood," 

and  eaten  in  the  supper  (of  the  Lord)  &c.  And  again,  in  the  second  prayer, 

only  after  an  heavenly  and  spiritual  or  thanksgiving  after  consecration, 

manner.  And  the  means  whereby  the  thus  :  "  We  give  thee  thanks,  for  that 

body  of  Christ  is  received  and  eaten  is  thou  dost  vouchsafe  to  feed  us,  which 

faith."  Eccl.  Angl.Art.XXVIII.  So  here  have  duly  received  these  holy  mysteries, 

is  the  manner  of  transubstantiation  de-  with  the  spiritual  food  of  the  most  pre- 

nied,  but  the  body  of  Christ  twice  af-  cious  body  and  blood  of  thy  Son  our 

firmed.  And  in  the  prayer  before  con-  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,"  &c. 


248  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  not  deny,  nay,  did  maintain  the  real  presence,  will  manifestly 
appear.  For  when  the  commissioners  obtruded  to  Jo.  Frith 
the  presence  of  Christ's  natural  body  in  the  sacrament,  and 
that  without  all  figure  or  similitude,  Jo.  Frith  acknowledges, 
"  m  That  the  inward  man  doth  as  verily  receive  Christ's  body 
as  the  outward  man  receives  the  sacrament  with  his  mouth." 
And  he  adds,  "  n  That  neither  side  ought  to  make  it  a  neces- 
sary article  of  faith,  but  leave  it  indifferent."  Nay,  arch- 
bishop Cranmer  comes  more  plainly  and  more  home  to  it 
than  Frith.  "  For  if  you  understand,"  saith  he0,  "  by  this  word 
really,  reipsa;  that  is,  in  very  deed  and  effectually;  so  Christ, 
by  the  grace  and  efficacy  of  his  passion,  is  indeed  and  truly 
present,  &c.  But  if  by  this  word  really  you  understand 
Vcorporaliter,  corporally  in  his  natural  and  organical  body, 
under  the  forms  of  bread  and  wine,  it  is  contrary  to  the  holy 
word  of  God."  And  so  likewise  bishop  Ridley.  Nay,  bishop  Rid- 
ley adds  yet  further,  and  speaks  so  fully  to  this  point,  as  I 
think  no  man  can  add  to  his  expression :  and  it  is  well  if 
some  protestants  except  not  against  it.  "  Both  you  and  I," 
saith  qhe,  "agree  in  this;  that  in  the  sacrament  is  the  very 
true  and  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  even  that  which 
was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  which  ascended  into  heaven, 
which  sits  on  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father,  which  shall 

m  Jo.  Fox,  Martyrolog.  torn,  ii.  Lon-  in  a  notorious  contradiction  :  or  else  it 

don,  1597.  p.  943.  will   follow   plainly   out   of  him,   that 

n  Fox,  ibid.  Christ  in  the  sacrament  is  existent  one 

o  Cranmer  apud  Fox,  ibid.  p.  1301.  way  and  received  another,  which  is  a 

I>  I  say  corporaliter,  corporally;  for  gross  absurdity.     And  that  corporaliter 

so  Bellarmine  hath  it  expressly :  Quod  was    the   doctrine    of    the    church   of 

autem  corporaliter  et  proprie  sumatur  Rome,  and  meant   by   transubstantia- 

sanguis  et  caro,  &c.  probari  potest  om-  tion,  is  further  plain  in  the  book  called 

nibus  argumentis,  &c.    Bellarm.  de  Eu-  The  Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,  set 

charist.  lib.  i.  c.  12.  §.  Sed  tota.     And  forth  by  the  bishops  in  convocation  in 

I  must  be  bold  to  tell  you  more  than  Henry  the  Eighth's  time,   anno  1534. 

that  this  is  the  doctrine  of  the  church  chap.  Of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar : 

of  Rome ;  for  I  must  tell  you  too,  that  the  words  are,  "  Under  the  form  and 

Bellarmine    here   contradicts   himself:  figure    of   bread    and  wine,   the   very 

for  he  that  tells  us  here,  that  it  can  be  body  and  blood  of  Christ  is  corporally, 

proved  by  many  arguments  that  we  re-  really,  &c.  exhibited  and  received,"  &c. 

ceive  the  flesh  and  the  blood  of  Christ  And  Aquinas  expresses  it  tlms :  Quia 

in   the   eucharist  corporaliter^   said  as  tamen  substantia  corporis  Christi  reali- 

expressly  before,  (had  he  remembered  ter  non  dividitur  a  sua  quantitate  di- 

it,)  that  though  Christ  be  in  this  blessed  mensiva,  et  ab  aliis  accidentibus,  inde 

sacrament  vere  et  realiter,  yet  (saith  he)  est,  quod  ex  vi  realis  concomitantiae  est  in 

non  dicemus  corporaliter,  i.  e.  eo  modo  hoc  sacramento  totaquantitasdimensiva 

quo  sua  natura   existunt  corpora,  &c.  corporis    Christi,   et   omnia   accidentia 

Bellarm.  de   Eucharist,  lib.  i.  c.  2.  §.  ejus.    Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  76.  Art.  4.  C. 

Tertia  regula.     So  Bellarmine  here  is  q  Apud  Fox,  ibid.  p.  1 598. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  249 

come  from  thence  to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead  :  only  we  Sect.  35. 
differ  in  modo,  in  the  way  and  manner  of  being.  We  confess 
all  one  thing  to  be  in  the  sacrament,  and  dissent  in  the  man- 
ner of  being  there.  I  confess  Christ1  s  natural  body  to  be  in 
the  sacrament  by  spirit  and  grace,  &c.  You  make  a  grosser 
kind  of  being,  inclosing  a  natural  body  under  the  shape  and 
form  of  bread  and  wine."  So  far  and  more,  bishop  Ridley. 
And  r archbishop  Cranmer  confesses  that  he  was  indeed  of 
another  opinion,  and  inclining  to  that  of  Zuinglius,  till  bishop 
Ridley  convinced  his  judgment  and  settled  him  in  this  point. 
And  for  s  Calvin,  he  comes  no  whit  short  of  these,  against  the 
calumny  of  the  Romanists  on  that  behalf.  Now  after  all  this, 
with  what  face  can  A.  C.  say  (as  he  doth),  that  protestants 
deny  or  doubt  of  the  true  and  real  presence  of  Christ  in  the 
sacrament  ?  I  cannot  well  tell,  or  am  unwilling  to  utter. 

Fifthly,  whereas  it  is  added  by  A.  C.,  "  That  in  this  present  Punct.  5. 
case  there  is  no  peril  of  any  damnable  heresy,  schism,  or  anyA'  C-P-66- 
other  sin,  in  resolving  to  live  and  die  in  the  Roman  church," 
that  is  not  so  neither ;  for  he  that  lives  in  the  Roman 
church  with  such  a  resolution,  is  presumed  to  believe  as  that 
church  believes.  And  he  that  doth  so,  I  will  not  say  is  as 
guilty,  but  guilty  he  is  more  or  less,  of  the  schism  which  that 
church  first  caused  by  her  corruptions,  and  now  continues  by 
them  and  her  power  together ;  and  of  all  her  damnable 
opinions  too  in  point  of  misbelief;  though  perhaps  A.  C.  will 
not  have  them  called  heresies,  unless  they  have  been  con- 
demned in  some  general  council,  and  of  all  other  sins  also, 
which  the  doctrine  and  misbelief  of  that  church  leads  him 
into.  And  mark  it  I  pray.  For  it  is  one  thing  to  live  in  a 
schismatical  church,  and  not  communicate  with  it  in  the 
schism,  or  in  any  false  worship  that  attends  it.  For  so  eElias 
lived  among  the  ten  tribes  and  was  not  schismatical,  and 
after  him  uElisseus.  But  then  neither  of  them  either  coun- 
tenanced the  schism,  or  worshipped  the  calves  in  Dan  or  in 

r  Apud  Fox,  ibid.  p.  1 703.  nem   esse   potum.      Talibus    alimentis 

*  Tantum  de  modo  quaestio  est,  &c.  animam    illi   mearn   pascendam  offero. 

Et  facessat  calumnia  auferri  Christum  In  S.  coana  jubet  me  sub  symbolis  pa- 

a  ccena  sua,  &c.     Calv.  Inst.  lib.  iv.  c.  nis  et  vim  corpus  et  sanguinern  suum 

J7-  §•  31-    Veritatera  Dei  in  qua  ac-  sumere,    mandxicare  et    bibere.      Nihil 

quiescere    tuto  licet,  sine   controversia  dubito,  quin   et  ipse  vere  porrigat:  et 

amplectar.      Pronunciat     ille     car  nem  ego  recipiam.   Calv.  ibid.  §.32. 

suam  esse  animee  meae  cibum,  sangui-  t  3  Reg.  xvii.         u  4  Reg.  iii. 

250  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  Bethel.  And  so  also,  beside  these  prophets,  did  those  thou- 
sands live  in  a  schismatical  church,  yet  x  never  bowed  their  knee 
to  Baal.  But  it  is  quite  another  thing  to  live  in  a  schismati- 
cal church,  and  communicate  with  it  in  the  schism  and  in  all  the 
superstitions  and  corruptions  which  that  church  teaches,  nay, 
to  live  and  die  in  them.  For  certainly  here  no  man  can  so 
live  in  a  schismatical  church,  but,  if  he  be  of  capacity  enough 
and  understand  it,  he  must  needs  be  a  formal  schismatic,  or 
an  involved  one  if  he  understand  it  not.  And  in  this  case  the 
church  of  Rome  is  either  far  worse  or  more  cruel  than  the 
church  of  Israel,  even  under  Ahab  and  Jezebel,  was.  The 
synagogue  indeed  was  corrupted  a  long  time  and  in  a  great 
degree ;  but  I  do  not  find  that  this  doctrine,  You  must  sacri- 
fice in  the  high  places,  or  this,  You  may  not  go  and  worship 
at  the  one  altar  in  Jerusalem,  was  either  taught  by  the 
priests  or  maintained  by  the  prophets,  or  enjoined  the  people 
by  the  sanhedrim:  nay,  can  you  shew  me  when  any  Jew, 
living  there  devoutly  according  to  the  law,  was  ever  punished 
for  omitting  the  one  of  these  or  doing  the  other  ?  But  the 
church  of  Rome  hath  solemnly  decreed  her  errors;  and 
erring,  hath  yet  decreed  withal  that  she  cannot  err ;  and  im- 
posed upon  learned  men  disputed  and  improbable  opinions, 
transubstantiation,  purgatory,  and  forbearance  of  the  cup  in 
the  blessed  eucharist,  even  against  the  express  command  of 
our  Saviour,  and  that  for  articles  of  faith.  And  to  keep  off 
/  disobedience,  whatever  the  corruption  be,  she  hath  bound  up 
her  decrees  upon  pain  of  excommunication  and  all  that  fol- 
lows upon  it.  Nay,  this  is  not  enough,  unless  the  fagot  be 
kindled  to  light  them  the  way.  This  then  may  be  enough  for 
us  to  leave  Rome,  though  the  yold  prophet  forsook  not  Israel. 
And  therefore  in  this  present  case  there  is  peril,  great  peril 
of  damnable  both  schism  and  heresy,  and  other  sin,  by  living 
and  dying  in  the  Roman  faith,  tainted  with  so  many  super- 
stitions as  at  this  day  it  is,  and  their  tyranny  to  boot.  So 
that  here  I  may  answer  A.  C.  just  as  z  St.  Augustine  answered 
Petilian  the  Donatist  in  the  fore-named  case  of  baptism.  For 

x  3  Reg-  xix.  1 8.  dem  perire  non  vultis.     Nam  ut  facile 

y  3  Reg.  xiii.  u.  cognoscatis  quod  ipsi  sunt  rei,  de  fide 

i-  Petilianus  dixit,  Venite  ad  ecclesiam  nostra  optime  judicant.     Ego   illorum 

populi,  et  aufugite  traditores  (ita   or-  infectos  baptizo.     Illi  meos  (quod  absit) 

thodoxos  turn   appellavit)   si   cum   iis-  recipiunt  baptizatos,  quse  omnino  non 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  251 

when  Petilian  pleaded  the  concession  of  his  adversaries,  Sect.  35. 
"  That  baptism,  as  the  Donatists  administered  it,  was  good 
and  lawful,"  and  thence  inferred,  (just  as  the  Jesuit  doth 
against  me,)  "  that  it  was  better  for  men  to  join  with  his  con- 
gregation than  with  the  church  ;"  St.  Augustine  answers  : 
"  We  do  indeed  approve  among  heretics  baptism,  but  so,  not 
as  it  is  the  baptism  of  heretics,  but  as  it  is  the  baptism  of 
Christ.  Just  as  we  approve  the  baptism  of  adulterers,  idola- 
ters, witches ;  and  yet  not  as  it  is  theirs,  but  as  it  is  Christ's 
baptism.  For  none  of  these,  for  all  their  baptism,  shall  inherit 
the  kingdom  of  God :  and  the  apostle  reckons  heretics  among 
them  a."  And  again  afterwards :  "  It  is  not  therefore  yours,11 
saith  b  St.  Augustine,  "  that  we  fear  to  destroy,  but  Christ's ; 
which,  even  among  the  sacrilegious,  is  of  and  in  itself  holy."1 
Now  you  shall  see  how  full  this  comes  home  to  our  Petilianist, 
A.  C.,  (for  he  is  one  of  the  contractors  of  the  church  of  Christ  to 
Rome,  as  the  Donatists  confined  it  to  Afric ;)  and  he  cries  out, 
"  That  a  possibility  of  salvation  is  a  free  confession  of  the  A.  C.  p.  64, 
adversaries,  and  is  of  force  against  them,  and  to  be  thought  5* 
extorted  from  them  by  force  of  truth  itself."  I  answer :  I  do 
indeed,  for  my  part,  (leaving  other  men  free  to  their  own  judg- 
ment,) acknowledge  a  possibility  of  salvation  in  the  Roman 
church ;  but  so,  as  that  which  I  grant  to  Romanists,  is  not 
as  they  are  Romanists,  but  as  they  are  Christians ;  that  is, 
as  they  believe  the  Creed  and  hold  the  foundation,  Christ 
himself,  not  as  they  associate  themselves  wittingly  and  know- 
ingly to  the  gross  superstitions  .of  the  Romish  church.  Nor 
do  I  fear  to  destroy  quod  ipsorum  est,  that  which  is  theirs ; 
but  yet  I  dare  not  proceed  so  roughly  as  with  theirs  or  for 
theirs  to  deny  or  weaken  the  foundation,  which  is  Christ's, 
even  among  them,  and  which  is  and  remains  holy,  even  in 
the  midst  of  their  superstitions  :  and  I  am  willing  to  hope 
there  are  many  among  them  which  keep  within  that  church, 

facerent,  si  in  baptismo  nostro  culpas  nes  enim  isti,  inter  quos  et  haeretici  sunt, 

aliquas  agnovissent.     Videte  ergo  quod  sicut  dicit  apostolus,  regnum   Dei   non 

damns,    qtiam   sanctum   sit,    quod   de-  possidebunt,  &c.     S.  August,  cont.  Lit. 

struere  metuit  sacrilegus  inimicus.  S.  Petiliani,  lib.  ii.  c.  108. 
August,  respondet:  Sic  approbamus  in  a  Gal.  v.  19,  20,  21. 
haereticis  baptismum,  non  haereticorum,  b  Non  ergo  vestrum  est  quod  de- 

sed  Christi ;  sicut  in  fornicatoribus,  ido-  struere  metuimus,  sed  Christi ;  quod  et 

lolatris,  veneficis,  &c.  approbamus  bap-  in  sacrilegis  per  se  sanctum  est.  S.  Au- 

tismum  non  eorum,  sed  Christi.     Om-  gust.  ibid. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  and  yet  wish  the  superstitions  abolished  which  they  know, 
and  which  pray  to  God  to  forgive  their  errors  in  what  they 
know  not ;  and  which  hold  the  foundation  firm,  and  live  ac- 
cordingly; and  which  would  have  all  things  amended  that 
are  amiss,  were  it  in  their  power.  And  to  such  I  dare  not 
deny  a  possibility  of  salvation,  for  that  which  is  Christ's  in 
them ;  though  they  hazard  themselves  extremely  by  keeping 
so  close  to  that  which  is  superstition,  and  in  the  case  of 
images  comes  too  near  idolatry.  Nor  can  A.  C.  shift  this  off 
A.  C.  p.  66.  by  adding,  "  living  and  dying  in  the  Eoman  church."  For 
this  "  living  and  dying  in  the  Roman  church"  (as  is  before 
expressed)  cannot  take  away  the  possibility  of  salvation  from 
them  which  believe  and  repent  of  whatsoever  is  error  or  sin 
in  them,  be  it  sin  known  to  them  or  be  it  not.  But  then 
perhaps  A.  C.  will  reply,  that  if  this  be  so,  I  must  then  main- 
tain that  a  Donatist  also,  living  and  dying  in  schism,  might 
be  saved.  To  which  I  answer  two  ways.  First,  that  a  plain 
honest  Donatist,  having  (as  is  confessed)  true  baptism,  and 
holding  the  foundation,  (as  for  aught  I  know  the  cDonatists 

c  For  though  Prateolus  will  make 
Donatus,  and  from  him  the  Donatists, 
to  be  guilty  of  an  impious  heresy  (I 
doubt  he  means  Arianism,  though  he 
name  it  not)  in  making  the  Son  of  God 
less  than  the  Father,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  less  than  the  Son,  De  Haeres. 
lib.  iv.  haer.  14,  yet  these  things  are 
most  manifest  out  of  St.  Augustine  con- 
cerning them,  who  lived  with  them, 
both  in  time  and  place,  and  understood 
them  and  their  tenets  far  better  than 
Prateolus  could.  . 

And  first,  St.  Augustine  tells  us  con- 
cerning them,  Ariani  Patris  et  Fi- 
lii  et  Spiritus  Sancti  diversas  sub- 
stantias  esse  dicunt :  Donatistae  autem 
imam  Trinitatis  substantiam  confiten- 
tur.  So  they  are  no  Arians. 

Secondly,  Si  aliqui  eorum  minorem 
Filium  esse  dixerunt  quam  Pater  est, 
ejusdem  tamen  substantial  non  nega- 
runt.  But  this  is  but  si  aliqui,  if  any. 
So  it  was  doubtful,  this  too,  though 
Prateolus  delivers  it  positively. 

Thirdly,  Plurimi  vero  in'iis  hoc  se 
dicunt,  omnino  credere  de  Patre  et  Fi- 
lio  et  Spiritu  Sancto,  quod  catholica 
credit  ecclesia.  Nee  ipsa  cum  illis  ver- 
titur  quaestio,  sed  de  sola  communione 

infoeliciter  litigant,  &c.  De  sola,  only 
about  the  union  with  the  church.  There- 
fore they  erred  not  in  fundamental 
points  of  faith.  And, 

Lastly,  all  that  can  further  be  said 
against  them  is,  that  some  of  them,  to 
win  the  Goths  to  them  when  they  were 
powerful,  said,  Hoc  se  credere  quod  et 
illi  credunt.  Now  the  Goths  (for  the 
most)  were  Arians  :  but  then,  saith  St. 
Augustine,  they  were  but  nonnulli, 
some  of  them.  And  of  this  some  it 
was  no  more  certain  than  sicut  audivi- 
musj  as  we  have  heard  ;  St.  Augustine 
knew  it  not.  And  then  if  it  were  true 
of  some,  yet  majorum  suorum  authori- 
tate  convincuntur;  quia  nee  Donatus 
ipse  sic  credidisse  asseritur,  de  cujus 
parte  se  esse  gloriantur.  S.  August. 
Epist.  50.  Where  Prateolus  is  again 
deceived;  for  he  says  expressly,  that 
Donatus  affirmed  the  Son  to  be  less 
than  the  Father  :  Impius  ille  asserebat, 
&c.  But  then  indeed,  (and  which  per- 
chance deceived  Prateolus,)  beside  Do- 
natus, the  founder  of  this  heresy,  there 
was  another  Donatus,  who  succeeded 
Majorinus  at  Carthage,  and  he  was 
guilty  of  the  heresy  which  Prateolus 
mentions;  Et  extant  scripta  ejus  ubi 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  253 

did,)  and  repenting  of  whatever  was  sin  in  him,  and  would  Sect.  35. 
have  repented  of  the  schism,  had  it  been  known  to  him,  might 
be  saved.  Secondly,  that  in  this  particular,  the  Romanist 
and  the  Donatist  differ  much  ;  and  that  therefore  it  is  not  of 
necessary  consequence,  that  if  a  Romanist  now  (upon  the  con- 
ditions before  expressed)  may  be  saved,  therefore  a  Donatist 
heretofore  might :  for  in  regard  of  the  schism,  the  Donatist 
was  in  one  respect  worse  and  in  greater  danger  of  damnation 
than  the  Romanist  now  is,  and  in  another  respect  better  and 
in  less  danger.  The  Donatist  was  in  greater  danger  of  dam- 
nation, if  you  consider  the  schism  itself  then  ;  for  they  brake 
from  the  orthodox  church  without  any  cause  given  them. 
And  here  it  doth  not  follow,  if  the  Romanist  have  a  possibility  of 
salvation,  therefore  a  Donatist  hath.  But  if  you  consider  the 
cause  of  the  schism  now,  then  the  Donatist  was  in  less  danger 
of  damnation  than  the  Romanist  is ;  because  the  church  of 
Rome  gave  the  first  and  the  greatest  cause  of  the  schism,  (as 
is  proved  d  before.)  And  therefore  here  it  doth  not  follow, 
that  if  a  Donatist  have  possibility  of  salvation,  therefore  a 
Romanist  hath ;  for  a  lesser  offender  may  have  that  possibi- 
lity of  safety  which  a  greater  hath  not. 

And  last  of  all ;  whereas  A.  C.  adds,  that  "  confessedly  Punct.  6. 
there  is  no  such  peril,"  that  is  a  most  loud  untruth,  and  an  ' p' 
ingenuous  man  would  never  have  said  it.  For  in  the  same 
e  place,  where  I  grant  a  possibility  of  salvation  in  the  Roman 
church,  I  presently  add,  that  it  is  no  secure  way  in  regard  of 
Roman  corruptions.  And  A.  C.  cannot  plead  for  himself, 
that  he  either  knew  not  this,  or  that  he  overlooked  it ;  for 
himself  disputes  against  it  as  strongly  as  he  can.  What  mo- 
desty or  truth  call  you  this  ?  for  he  that  confesses  a  possi- 
bility of  salvation,  doth  not  thereby  confess  no  peril  of  dam- 
nation in  the  same  way.  Yea,  but  if  some  protestants  should 
say  there  is  peril  of  damnation  to  live  and  die  in  the  Roman 
faith,  their  saying  is  nothing  in  comparison  of  the  number 
or  worth  of  those  that  say  there  is  none.  So  A.  C.  again: 
"  And  beside,  they  which  say  it  are  contradicted  by  their  own 

apparet,    as     St.  Augustine    confesses,  that   this  Donatus  held  that  opinion, 

De  H seres,  lib.  i.  haer.  69.     But  then  much    less   did  they   believe   it  them- 

St.  Augustine  adds  there  also,  nee  fa-  selves.    S.  August,  ibid, 

cile   in  iis   quisquam,  that  scarce  any  d  Sect.  2 1 .  num.  I,  &c. 

of  the  Donatists  did  so  much  as  know  e  Sect.  35.  num.  I,  II. 

254  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  more  learned  brethren."  Here  A.  C.  speaks  very  confusedly:  but 
A.  C.  p.  66.  whether  he  speak  of  protestants  or  Romanists,  or  mixes  them, 
the  matter  is  not  great ;  for  as  for  the  number  and  worth  of 
men,  they  are  no  necessary  concluders  of  truth.  Not  num- 
ber :  for  who  would  be  judged  by  the  many  ?  The  time  was 
when  the  fArians  were  too  many  for  the  orthodox.  Not 
worth  simply;  for  that  once  s misled,  is  of  all  other  the  greatest 
misleader :  and  yet  God  forbid  that  to  worth  weaker  men 
should  not  yield  in  difficult  and  perplexed  questions ;  yet  so 
as  that  when  matters  fundamental  in  the  faith  come  in  ques- 
tion, they  finally  rest  upon  a  higher  and  clearer  certainty 
than  can  be  found  in  either  number  or  weight  of  men. 
Besides,  if  you  mean  your  own  party,  you  have  not  yet  proved 
your  party  more  worthy  for  life  or  learning  than  the  protest- 
ants.  Prove  that  first,  and  then  it  will  be  time  to  tell  you 
how  worthy  many  of  your  popes  have  been  for  either  life  or 
learning.  As  for  the  rest,  you  may  blush  to  say  it :  for  all 
protestants  unanimously  agree  in  this,  "  That  there  is  great 
peril  of  damnation  for  any  man  to  live  and  die  in  the  Roman 
persuasion ;"  and  you  are  not  able  to  produce  any  one  pro- 
testant  that  ever  said  the  contrary.  And  therefore  that  is  a 
most  notorious  slander,  where  you  say,  that  they  which  affirm 
A.  C.  p.  66.  this  peril  of  damnation  are  contradicted  by  their  own  more 
learned  brethren. 

VII. — And  thus  having  cleared  the  way  against  the  excep- 

f  Ingemuit  totus  orbis,  et  Arianum  propterea  causa  fidei  fit  inferior;  nam 
se  esse  miratus  est.  S.  Hier.  advers.  olirn  tres  solurn  erant  reperti,  qui  regis 
Luciferian.  post  medium,  torn.  ii. — Aria-  mandate resisterent, &c.  Theod.  Hist.  Ec- 
norum  venenum  non  jam  portiunculam  cles.  lib.  ii.c.  16.  dialogo  inter  Constant, 
quandam,  sed  pene  orbem  totum  con-  imp.  et  Liberium  papam.  So  that  pope 
tarninaverat,  adeo  ut  prope  cunctis  La-  did  not  think  multitude  any  great  note 
tini  sermonis  episcopis,  partim  vi,  partim  of  the  true  church.  Ubi  sunt,  &c.  qui 
fraude  deceptis,  caligo  quaedam  menti-  ecclesiam  multitudine  definiunt,  et  par- 
bus  offunderetur,  &c.  Vin.  Lirin.  cont.  vum  gregern  aspernantur,  &c.  Greg. 
Haeres.  c.  6. — Ecclesia  non  parietibus  Naz.  Orat.  25.  prin.  Nay,  the  Arians 
consistit,  sed  in  dogmatum  veritate.  were  grown  to  that  boldness,  that  they 
Ecclesia  ibi  est,  ubi  fides  vera  est.  Cae-  objected  to  the  catholics  of  that  time 
terum  ante  annos  quindecim,  autviginti,  paucitatem,  the  thinness  of  their  num- 
parietes  omnes  hie  ecclesiarum  haeretici  ber,  Greg.  Naz.Carm.  de  Vita  sua,  p.  24. 
(de  Arianis  et  aliis  haereticis  loquitur)  edit.  Paris.  1611. — Quum  ejecti  tamen 
possidebant,  &c.  Ecclesia  autem  illic  essent  de  civitatibus,  jactabant  in  de- 
erat,  ubi  fides  vera  erat.  S.  Hier.  in  sertis  suis  synagogis  illud,  Multivocati, 
Psal.  cxxxiii. — Constantius  :  Tantane  pauci  electi.  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  i. 
orbis  terrae  pars,  liberi,  in  te  residet,  c.  10. 

ut  tu  solus  homini  impio  (de  Athanasio         g  Error  Origenis  et  Tertulliani  magna 

loquitur)  subsidio  venire,  et  pacem  orbis  fuit  in  ecclesia  Dei  populi  tentatio.  Vin. 

ae  mundi  totius  dirimere  audeas  ?  Libe-  Lirin.  cont.  Hsr.  c.  23  et  24. 
rius :  Esto  quod  ego  solus  sim,  non  tamen 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  255 


tions  of  A.  C.  to  the  two  former  instances,  I  will  now  pro-  Sect.  35. 
ceed  (as  I  h  promised)  to  make  this  further  appear,  that  A.  C. 
and  his  fellows  dare  not  stand  to  that  ground  which  is  here 
laid  down,  namely,  "  That  in  point  of  faith  and  salvation, 
it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  take  that  way  which  the  adversary 
confesses  to  be  true,  or  whereon  the  differing  parties  agree ;" 
and  that  if  they  do  stand  to  it,  they  must  be  forced  to  main- 
tain the  church  of  England  in  many  things  against  the 
church  of  Rome. 

And  first,  I  instance  in  the  Article  of  our  Saviour  Chrises  Punct.  i. 
descent  into  hell.  I  hope  the  church  of  Rome  believes  this 
article  ;  and  withal,  that  hell  is  the  place  of  the  damned  :  so 
doth  the  church  of  England.  In  this  then  these  dissenting 
churches  agree ;  therefore,  according  to  the  former  rule,  (yea, 
and  here  in  truth  too,)  it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  believe  this 
article  of  the  Creed,  as  both  agree ;  that  is,  that  Christ 
descended  in  soul  into  the  place  of  the  damned.  But  this 
the  Romanists  will  not  endure  at  any  hand ;  "for  the 
school1  agree  in  it,  that  the  soul  of  Christ  in  the  time  of  his 
death  went  really  no  further  than  in  Iwibum  patrum  ,-"  which 
is  not  the  place  of  the  damned,  but  a  region  or  quarter  in 
the  upper  part  of  hell  (as  they  call  it),  built  up  there  by  the 
Romanist,  without  license  of  either  scripture  or  the  primitive 
church.  And  a  man  would  wonder  how  those  builders  iwith 
untempered  mortar  found  light  enough  in  that  dark  place  to 
build  as  they  have  done. 

Secondly,  I  will  instance  in  the  institution  of  the  sacrament  Punct.  2. 
in  both  kinds.  That  Christ  instituted  it  so,  is  confessed  by 
both  churches ;  that  the  ancient  churches  received  it  so,  is 
agreed  by  both  churches  :  therefore,  according  to  the  former 
rule,  (and  here  in  truth  too,)  it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  receive 
this  sacrament  in  both  kinds.  And  yet  here  this  ground  of 
A.  C.  must  not  stand  for  good  ;  no,  not  at  Rome ;  but  to 
receive  in  one  kind  is  enough  for  the  laity.  And  the  poor 

Bohemians k  must  have  a  dispensation,  that  it  may  be  lawful 


h  Sect.  35.  num.  IV.  k  Basiliense  concilium  concessit  Bohe- 
i  Sequuntur  enim  Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  52.  mis  utriusque  speciei  usum :  modo  fate- 
Art.    2.    c.  Verha   ejus   sunt.     Anima  rentur  id  sibi  concedi  ah  ecclesia,  non 
Christi  per   suam  essentiam   descendit  autem  ad  hoc  teneri  divino  jure.     Bel- 
solum  ad   locum   inferni,  in  quo  justi  larm.  de   Sacrament,  in  genere,  lib.  i. 
detinebantur,  &c.  c.  2.  §.  2. 
i  Ezech.  xiii.  10. 

256  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  for  them  to  receive  the  sacrament  as  Christ  commanded 
them.  And  this  must  not  be  granted  to  them  neither,  unless 
they  will  acknowledge  (most  opposite  to  truth)  that  they  are 
not  bound  by  divine  law  to  receive  it  in  both  kinds.  And 
here  their  building  with  untempered  mortar  appears  most 
manifestly :  for  they  have  no  show  to  maintain  this  but  the 
fiction  of  Thomas  of  Aquin,  "  That  he  which  receives  the 
body  of  Christ  receives  also  his  blood  per  concomitantiam,  by 
concomitancy  ;  because  the  blood  goes  always  with  the  body :" 
of  which  term  'Thomas  was  the  first  author  I  can  yet  find. 
First  then,  if  this  be  true,  I  hope  Christ  knew  it ;  and  then, 
why  did  he  so  unusefully  institute  it  in  both  kinds  ?  Next, 
if  this  be  true,  concomitancy  accompanies  the  priest  as  well 
as  the  people ;  and  then,  why  may  not  he  receive  it  in  one 
kind  also  I  Thirdly,  this  is  apparently  not  true  :  for  the 
eucharist  is  a  sacrament  sanguinis  efusi,  of  blood  shed  and 
v  poured  out ;  and  blood  poured  out,  and  so  severed  from  the 
body,  goes  not  along  with  the  body  per  concomitantiam.  And 
yet  Christ  must  rather  err,  or  proceed  I  know  not  how  in  the 
institution  of  the  sacrament  in  both  kinds,  rather  than  the 
holy,  unerring  church  of  Rome  may  do  amiss  in  the  deter- 
mination for  it  and  the  administration  of  it  in  one  kind.  Nor 
will  the  distinction,  "  That  Christ  instituted  this  as  a  sacri- 
fice, to  which  both  kinds  were  necessary,"  serve  the  turn  :  for 
i  suppose  that  true,  yet  he  instituted  it  as  a  sacrament  also, 

f"$V»  or  else  that  sacrament  had  no  institution  from  Christ ;  which 
I  suppose  A.  C.  dares  not  affirm.  And  that  institution  which 
the  sacrament  had  from  Christ  was  in  both  kinds. 

Punrt.  3.  And  since  here  is  mention  happened  of  sacrifice,  my  third 
instance  shall  be  in  the  sacrifice  which  is  offered  up  to  God 
in  that  great  and  high  mystery  of  our  redemption  by  the 
death  of  Christ.  For  as  Christ  offered  up  m himself  once  for 

1  Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  76.  Art.  2.  C.  et  alibi  which  place  the  school  infers,  Passionem 

passim.  Christi  verum  sacrificium  fuisse.  Thorn. 

"'  Christ,  by  his  own  blood,  entered  p.  3.  q.  48.  Art.  3.  C. — "Christ  did  suffer 

once  into  the  holy  place,  and  obtained  death  upon  the  cross  for  our  redernp- 

eiernal  redemption  for  us,  Heb.  ix.  12.  tion  ;  and  made  there,  by  his  one  obla- 

And  this  was  done  by  way  of  sacrifice,  tion  of  himself  once  offered,  a  full,  per- 

by  the   offering   of  the   body   of  Jesus  feet,    and   sufficient  sacrifice,   oblation, 

Christ  once  made,  Heb.  x.  10.     Christ  and    satisfaction    for   the   sins   of  the 

gave  himself  for  us,  to  be  an  offering  whole  world."    Eccles.  Angl  in  Canone 

and  a  sacrifice  of  a  sweetsmelling  sa-  Consecrationis  Eucharist. 
vour  unto  God,  Ephes.  v.  2.     Out  of 

Fisher  the  Jesuit. 


all,  a  full  and  all-sufficient  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  Sect.  35. 
world,  so  did  he  institute  and  command  a  "memory  of  this 
sacrifice  in  a  sacrament,  even  till  his  coming  again.  For  at 
and  in  the  eucharist  we  offer  up  to  God  three  sacrifices  : 
one  by  the  priest  only ;  that  is  the  °  commemorative  sacrifice 
of  Christ's  death,  represented  in  bread  broken  and  wine  poured 
out ;  another  by  the  P priest  and  the  people  jointly,  and  that 
is  the  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving  for  all  the  benefits 
and  graces  we  receive  by  the  precious  death  of  Christ ;  the 
third,  qby  every  particular  man  for  himself  only  ;  and  that  is 

n  "  And  Christ  did  institute,  and  in 
his  holy  gospel  command  us  to  continue, 
a  perpetual  memory  of  that  his  precious 
death  until  his  coming  again."  Eccles. 
Angl.  Ibid. 

o  Sacramentum  hoc  est  commemora- 
tivum  Dominicae  passionis,  quae  fuit 
verum  sacrificium ;  et  sic  nominator 
sacrificium.  Thorn,  p.  3.  q.  73.  Art.  4.  C. 
— "  Christ  being  offered  up  once  for  all  in 
his  own  proper  person,  is  yet  said  to  be 
offered  up,  &c.  in  the  celebration  of  the 
sacrament ;  because  his  oblation  once 
for  ever  made  is  thereby  represented." 
Lambert  in  Fox  his  Martyrology,  vol. 
ii.  edit.  Lond.  1579.  P-  TO33- — Et  postea. 
"  It  is  a  memorial  or  representation  there- 
of." Ibid.  The  master  of  the  sentences 
judged  truly  in  this  point,  saying,  "  That 
which  is  offered  and  consecrated  of  the 
priest  is  called  a  sacrifice  and  oblation, 
because  it  is  a  memory  and  represent- 
ation of  the  true  sacrifice  and  holy  obla- 
tion made  on  the  altar  of  the  cross." 
Archbishop  Cranmer,  in  his  Answer  to 
Bishop  Gardiner,  concerning  the  most 
holy  Sacrament,  lib.  v.  p.  377.  And 
again,  this  shortly  is  the  mind  of  Lom- 
bardus,  "  That  the  thing  which  is  done 
at  God's  board  is  a  sacrifice,  and  so  is 
that  also  which  was  made  upon  the 
cross,  but  not  after  one  manner  of  un- 
derstanding :  for  this  was  the  thing 
indeed,  and  that  is  the  commemoration 
of  the  thing."  Ibid.  So  likewise  bishop 
Jewel  acknowledgeth  incruentum  et  ra- 
tionabile  sacrificium,  spoken  of  by  Euse- 
bius  de  Demonstrat.  Evang.  lib.  i. 
Jeivel's  Reply  against  Harding,  Art.  7. 
Divis.  9.  Again,  the  ministration  of 
the  holy  communion  is  sometimes  of 
the  ancient  Fathers  called  an  unbloody 
sacrifice  ;  not  in  respect  of  any  corporal 
or  fleshly  presence  that  is  imagined  to 
be  there  without  blood -shed ding,  but 
for  that  it  representeth  and  reporteth 

to  OTir  minds  that  one  and  everlasting 
sacrifice  that  Christ  made  in  his  body 
upon  the  cross.  This  bishop  Jewel 
disliketh  not  in  his  Answer  to  Harding, 
Art.  17.  Divis.  14.  Patres  coenam  Do- 
minicam  duplici  de  causa  vocarunt  sa- 
crificium incruentum.  Turn  quod  sit 
imago  et  solennis  repraesentatio  illius 
sacrificii  /Actcm/coD  quod  Christus  cum 
sanguinis  effusione  obtulit  in  cruce  : 
turn  quod  sit  etiam  eucharisticum  sacri- 
ficium, id  est,  sacrificium  laudis  et  gra- 
tiarum  actionis,  cum  pro  beneficiis  om- 
nibus, turn  pro  redemptione  imprimis 
per  Christi  mortem  peracta.  Zanch.  in 
2.  Praecept.  Decal.  torn.  iv.  pag.  459. 
And  Dr.  Fulk  also  acknowledges  a  sa- 
crifice in  the  eucharist,  in  St.  Matth. 
xxvi.  26.  Non  dissimulaverint  Chris- 
tiani  in  ccena  Domini,  sive  ut  ipsi  loque- 
bantur,  in  sacrificio  altaris  peculiar! 
quodam  modo  praesentem  se  venerari 
Deum  Christianorum,  sed  quae  esset 
forma  ejus  sacrificii  quod  per  symbola 
panis  et  vini  peragitur,  hoc  veteres  prae 
se  non  ferebant.  Isa.  Casaub.  Exercit. 
1 6.  ad  Annal.  Baron.  §.  43.  p.  560. 

P  In  the  Liturgy  of  the  church  of 
England,  we  pray  to  God,  immediately 
after  the  reception  of  the  sacrament,  that 
he  would  be  pleased  to  accept  this  our 
"  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving," 
&c.  And  Heb.  xiii.  15.  "  The  sacrifice 
propitiatory  was  made  by  Christ  him- 
self only,  but  the  sacrifice  commemora- 
tive and  gratulatory  is  made  by  the 
priest  and  the  people."  Archbishop 
Cranmer  in  his  Answer  to  Bishop  Gardi- 
ner, lib.  v.  p.  377. 

<l  /  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the 
mercies  of  God,  that  you  give  up  your 
bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy,  and  ac- 
ceptable unto  God.  Rom.  xii.  i. — "  We 
offer,  and  present  unto  thee,  O  Lord, 
ourselves,  our  souls  and  bodies,  to  be  a 
reasonable,  holy,  and  living  sacrifice 

258  Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35.  the  sacrifice  of  every  man's  body  and  soul,  to  serve  him  in 
both  all  the  rest  of  his  life  for  this  blessing  thus  bestowed  on 
him.  Now  thus  far  these  dissenting  churches  agree,  that 
in  the  eucharist  there  is  a  sacrifice  of  duty,  and  a  sacrifice 
of  praise,  and  a  sacrifice  of  commemoration  of  Christ.  There- 
fore, according  to  the  former  rule,  (and  here  in  truth  too,) 
it  is  safest  for  a  man  to  believe  the  commemorative,  the 
praising,  and  the  performing  sacrifice;  and  to  offer  them 
duly  to  Grod,  and  leave  the  church  of  Rome  in  this  particular 
to  her  superstitions,  that  I  may  say  no  more.  And  would 
the  church  of  Rome  stand  to  A.  C.'s  rule,  and  believe  dissent- 
ing parties  where  they  agree,  were  it  but  in  this  and  that 
•  before  of  the  real  presence,  it  would  work  far  toward  the 
peace  of  Christendom.  But  the  truth  is,  they  pretend  the 
peace  of  Christendom,  but  care  no  more  for  it,  than  as  it  may 
uphold  at  least,  if  not  increase  their  own  greatness. 
Punct.  4.  My  fourth  instance  shall  be  in  the  sacrament  of  baptism, 
and  the  things  required  as  necessary  to  make  it  effectual  to 
the  receiver.  They,  in  the  common  received  doctrine  of  the 
church  of  Rome,  are  three ;  the  matter,  the  form,  and  the 
intention  of  the  priest  to  do  that  which  the  church  doth  and 
intends  he  should  do.  Now  all  other  divines,  as  well  ancient 
as  modern,  and  both  the  dissenting  churches  also,  agree  in 
the  two  former ;  but  many  deny  that  the  intention  of  the 
priest  is  necessary.  Will  A.  C.  hold  his  rule,  "  That  it  is 
safest  to  believe,  in  a  controverted  point  of  faith,  that  which 
the  dissenting  parties  agree  on,  or  which  the  adverse  part 
confesses  T  If  he  will  not,  then  why  should  he  press  that 
as  a  rule  to  direct  others,  which  he  will  not  be  guided  by 
himself?  And  if  he  will,  then  he  must  go  professedly  against 
the  r  council  of  Trent,  which  hath  determined  it  as  de  fide, 
as  a  point  of  faith,  that  the  intention  of  the  priest  is  neces- 
sary to  make  the  baptism  true  and  valid.  Though  in  the 
history8  of  that  council,  it  is  most  apparent  the  bishops  and 
other  divines  there  could  not  tell  what  to  answer  to  the 
bishop  of  Minors,  a  Neapolitan,  who  declared  his  judgment 
openly  against  it  in  the  face  of  that  council. 

unto  thee."    So  the  Church  of  England,         r  Concil.  Trid.  Sess.  7.  Can.  n. 

in  the  prayer  after  the  receiving  of  the         s  Hist.  Concil.  Trid.  lib.  ii.  p.  277. 

blessed  sacrament.  edit.  Lat.  Leyda?,  1622. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  259 

My  fifth  instance  is,  We  say.  and  can  easily  prove,  there  Sect.  35. 
are  divers  errors,  and  some  gross  ones,  in  the  Roman  Missal.  punct.  5. 
But  I  myself  have  heard  some  Jesuits  confess,  that  in  the 
Liturgy  of  the  church  of  England  there  is  no  positive  error ; 
and  being  pressed  why  then  they  refused  to  come  to  our 
churches,  and  serve  God  with  us,  they  answered,  they  could 
not  do  it,  because,  though  our  Liturgy  had  in  it  nothing  ill, 
yet  it  wanted  a  great  deal  of  that  which  was  good  and  was 
in  their  service.  Now  here  let  A.  C.  consider  again,  here 
is  a  plain  concession  of  the  adverse  part ;  and  both  agree 
there  is  nothing  in  our  service  but  that  which  is  holy  and 
good.  What  will  the  Jesuit  or  A.  C.  say  to  this?  If  he 
forsake  his  ground,  then  it  is  not  safest  in  point  of  divine 
worship  to  join  faith,  as  the  dissenting  parties  agree,  or  to 
stand  to  the  adversaries'  own  confession :  if  he  be  so  hardy  as 
to  maintain  it,  then  the  English  Liturgy  is  better  and  safer  to 
worship  God  by  than  the  Roman  mass;  which  yet,  I  pre- 
sume, A.  0.  will  not  confess. 

VIII. — In  all  these  instances  (the  matter  so  falling  out  of 
itself,  for  the  argument  enforces  it  not)  the  thing  is  true ; 
but  not  therefore  true,  because  the  dissenting  parties  agree 
in  it,  or  because  the  adverse  part  confesses  it:  yet  lest  the 
Jesuit,  or  A.  C.  for  him,  further  to  deceive  the  weak,  should 
infer  that  this  rule  in  so  many  instances  is  true,  and  false  in 
none,  but  that  one  concerning  baptism  among  the  Donatists, 
and  therefore  the  argument  is  true  ut  plerumque,  as  for  the 
most,  and  that  therefore  it  is  the  safest  way  to  believe  that 
which  dissenting  parties  agree  on ;  I  will  lay  down  some 
other  particulars  of  as  great  consequence  as  any  can  be  in 
or  about  Christian  religion.  And  if  in  them  A.  C.  or  any 
Jesuit  dare  say,  that  it  is  safest  to  believe  as  the  dissenting 
parties  agree,  or  as  the  adverse  party  confesses,  I  dare  say 
he  shall  be  an  heretic  in  the  highest  degree,  if  not  an  infidel. 

And  first,  where  the  question  was  betwixt  the  orthodox  Punct.  i. 
and  the  Arian,  whether  the  Son  of  God  were  consubstantiated 
with  the  Father :  the  orthodox  said  he  was  ojuoowo-to?,  of 
the  same  substance ;  the  Arian  came  within  a  letter  of  the 
truth,  and  said  he  was  o/uoiouVto?,  of  like  substance  :  now  he 
that  says  he  is  of  the  same  substance,  confesses  he  is  of  like 
substance  and  more,  that  is,  identity  of  substance ;  for  iden- 

S  2 

260  Archbishop  Laud  against 

sect.  35.  tity  contains  in  it  all  degrees  of  likeness,  and  more :  but  he 
that  acknowledges  and  believes  that  he  is  of  like  nature  and 
no  more,  denies  the  identity.  Therefore  if  this  rule  be  true, 
"  That  it  is  safest  to  believe  that  in  which  the  dissenting 
parties  agree,  or  which  the  adverse  part  confesses,"  (which 
A.c.  p.f>4,A.  C.  makes  such  great  vaunt  of,)  then  it  is  safest  for  a 
Christian  to  believe  that  Christ  is  of  like  nature  with  God 
the  Father,  and  be  free  from  belief  that  he  is  consubstantial 
with  him;  which  yet  is  concluded  by  the  'council  of  Nice 
as  necessary  to  salvation,  and  the  contrary  condemned  for 
damnable  heresy. 

Punct.  2.  Secondly,  in  the  question  about  the  resurrection,  between 
the  orthodox  and  divers  gross  u  heretics  of  old,  and  the 
anabaptists  and  libertines  of  late.  For  all  or  most  of  these 
dissenting  parties  agree,  that  there  ought  to  be  a  resurrec- 
tion from  sin  to  a  state  of  grace  ;  and  that  this  resurrection 
only  is  meant  in  divers  passages  of  holy  scripture,  together 
with  the  life  of  the  soul,  which  they  are  content  to  say  is 
immortal;  but  xthey  utterly  deny  any  resurrection  of  the 
body  after  death :  so  with  them  that  article  of  the  Creed  is 
gone.  Now  then,  if  any  man  will  guide  his  faith  by  this  rule 
of  A.  C.,  the  consent  of  dissenting  parties,  or  the  confession 
of  the  adverse  part,  he  must  deny  the  resurrection  of  the 
body  from  the  grave  to  glory,  and  believe  none  but  that  of 
the  soul  from  sin  to  grace,  which  the  adversaries  confess,  and 
in  which  the  dissenting  parties  agree. 

Punct.  3.  Thirdly,  in  the  great  dispute  of  all  others  about  the  unity 
of  the  Godhead :  all  dissenting  parties,  Jew,  Turk,  and  Chris- 
tian ;  among  Christians  orthodox  and  antitrinitarian  of  old ; 
and  in  these  latter  times,  orthodox  and  Socinian,  (that  horrid 
and  mighty  monster  of  all  heresies ;)  agree  in  this,  that  there 
is  but  one  God.  And  I  hope  it  is  as  necessary  to  believe 
one  God  our  Father,  as  one  church  our  mother.  Now  will 

t  Concil.  Nicaen.  Fides  vel  Symboluin  pectamus,  &c.  ut  homo  sciat  animara 

in  fine  Concil.  suam  spiritum  immortalem  esse  perpe- 

u  Saturninus,  Basilides,  Carpocrates,  tuo  viventem  in  coelis,  &c.  Calv.  In- 

Cerinthus,  Valentinus,  Cerdon,  Apelles,  structione  advers.  Libertinos,  c.  22. 

&c.  Tertull.  de  Prescript,  advers.  Hse-  princ. — Sunt  etiam  hodie  libertini  qui 

ret.  c.  46,  48,  49,  5 1 ,  &c.  earn  irrident,  et  resurrectionem  quae 

x  Libertini  rident  spem  omnem  quam  tractatur  in  scripturis,  tantum  ad  ani- 

de  resurrectione  habemus,  idque  jam  mas  refenint.  Pet.  Mart.  Loc.  Com. 

nobis  evenisse  dicunt,  quod  adhuc  ex-  Class.  3.  cap.  15.  num.  4. 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  261 

A.  0.  say  here  it  is  safest  believing  as  the  dissenting  parties  Sect.  35. 
agree,  or  as  the  adverse  parties  confess,  namely,  that  there  is 
but  one  God,  and  so  deny  the  Trinity,  and  therewith  the  Son 
of  God  the  Saviour  of  the  world  ? 

Fourthly,  in  a  point  as  fundamental  in  the  faith  as  this ;  Punct.  4- 
namely,  whether  Christ  be  true  and  very  God.  For  which 
very  point  most  of  the  y  martyrs  in  the  primitive  church  laid 
down  their  lives.  The  dissenting  parties  here  were  the  ortho- 
dox believers,  who  affirm  he  is  both  God  and  man ;  for  so  our 
Creed  teaches  us :  and  all  those  heretics,  which  affirm  Christ 
to  be  man,  but  deny  him  to  be  God ;  as  the  zArians,  and 
aCarpocratians,  and  bCerinthus,  and  cHebion,  with  others; 
and  at  this  day  the  dSocinians.  These  dissenting  parties 
agree  fully  and  clearly  that  Christ  is  man.  Well  then,  dare 
A.  C.  stick  to  his  rule  here,  and  say,  it  is  safest  for  a  Chris- 
tian, in  this  great  point  of  faith,  to  govern  his  belief  by  "  the 
consent  of  these  dissenting  parties,"  or  "  the  confession  and 
acknowledgment  of  the  adverse  party;"  and  so  settle  his 
belief  that  Christ  is  a  mere  man,  and  not  God?  I  hope  he 
dares  not.  So  then  this  rule,  "  To  resolve  a  man's  faith  into 
that  in  which  the  dissenting  parties  agree,  or  which  the  ad- 
verse part  confesses,"  is  as  often  false  as  true ;  and  false  in  as 
great,  if  not  greater  matters,  than  those  in  which  it  is  true. 
And  where  it  is  true,  A.  C.  and  his  fellows  dare  not  govern 
themselves  by  it,  the  church  of  Rome  condemning  those 
things  which  that  rule  proves.  And  yet  while  they  talk  of 
certainty,  nay,  of  infallibility,  (less  will  not  serve  their  turns,) 
they  are  driven  to  make  use  of  such  poor  shifts  as  these, 
which  have  no  certainty  at  all  of  truth  in  them,  but  infer 
falsehood  and  truth  alike.  And  yet  for  this  also  men  will  be 
so  weak  or  so  wilful  as  to  be  seduced  by  them. 

IX. — I  told  you  e  before,  that  the  force  of  the  preceding 
argument  lies  upon  two  things  :  the  one  expressed,  and  that 

y  Heb.  xi.  37.  Cyrillus  Alexandrinus         b  Tertul.  ibid. 

male   audivit,  quod  Ammonium   mar-         c  Tertul.  lib.  de  Carne  Christi,  0.14. 
tyrem  appellavit,  quern  constitit  teme-         d  Si  ad  Jesu  Christi  respicias  essen- 

ritatis  poenas  dedisse,  et  non  necessitate  tiam   atque   naturam,  non   nisi  homi- 

negandi  Christi  in  tormentis  esse  mor-  nem  eum  fuisse  constanter  affirmamus. 

tuurn.    Socr.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vii.  c.  14.  Volkelius,  lib.  iii,  de  Religione  Christia- 

z  Optatus,  lib.  iv.  cont.  Parmen.  na,  c.  i. 

a  Tertul.  lib.  de  Prescript,  c.  48.  e  Sect.  35.  num.  II.  fine. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect. 35.  is  past;  the  other  upon  the  by,  which  comes  now  to  be 
handled.  And  that  is  your  continual  poor  outcry  against 
us,  "  That  we  cannot  be  saved,  because  we  are  out  of  the 
church."  Sure,  if  I  thought  I  were  out,  I  would  get  in  as 
fast  as  I  could.  For  we  confess,  as  well  as  you,  that  "  fout 
of  the  catholic  church  of  Christ  there  is  no  salvation."  But 
what  do  you  mean  by  "  out  of  the  church  T  Sure  out  of  the 
s  Roman  church.  Why,  but  the  Roman  church  and  the 
church  of  England  are  but  two  distinct  members  of  that 
catholic  church  which  is  spread  over  the  face  of  the  earth. 
Therefore  Rome  is  not  the  house  where  the  church  dwells, 
but  Rome  itself,  as  well  as  other  particular  churches,  dwells 
in  this  great  universal  house ;  unless  you  will  shut  up  the 
church  in  Rome,  as  the  Donatist  did  in  Afric.  I  come  a 
little  lower :  Rome  and  other  national  churches  are  in  this 
universal  catholic  house  as  so  many  h  daughters,  to  whom 
(under  Christ)  the  care  of  the  household  is  committed  by  God 
the  Father,  and  the  catholic  church  the  mother  of  all  Chris- 
tians. Rome,  as  an  elder  sister,  Jbut  not  the  eldest  neither, 

f  Extra  ecclesiam  neminem  vivificat 
Spiritus  Sanctus.  S.  August.  Epist.  50. 
ad  finem.  Field,  de  Eccles.  lib.  i.  c.  13. — 
Una  est  fidelium  universalis  ecclesia 
extra  quara  nullus  salvatur.  Cone.  La- 
teran.  Can.  i.  And  yet  even  there, 
there  is  no  mention  of  the  Roman 

g  And  so  doth  A.  C.  too,  "  Out  of 
the  catholic  Roman  church  there  is  no 
possibility  of  salvation."  A.  C.  p.  65. 

h  And  daughter  Sion  was  God's  own 
phrase  of  old  of  the  church,  Isa.  i.  8.  o& 
yap  TTfpl  TUIV  'Iou5o/a>y  TOVTOV  rbv  \6yov 
irpovirf(f)-r]vev  ov5e  irepl  rys  ^,iwv  TTJS 
T($Aea>s,  aAAa  irepl  TTJS  e/c/cATjcr/as.  Hyp- 
pol.  Orat.  de  Consum.  Mundi. — Et 
omnis  ecclesia  virgo  appellata  est.  S. 
August.  Tract.  13  in  S.  Joh. 

i  For  Christ  was  to  be  preached  to 
all  nations,  but  that  preaching  was  to 
begin  at  Jerusalem,  Luke  xxiv.  47, 
according  to  the  prophecy,  Mic.  iv.  2. 
And  the  disciples  were  first  called 
Christians  at  Antioch,  Acts  xi.  26. 
And  therefore  there  was  a  church  there 
before  ever  St.  Peter  came  thence  to 
settle  one  at  Rome.  Nor  is  it  an 
opinion  destitute  either  of  authority  or 
probability,  that  the  faith  of  Christ  was 
preached  and  the  sacraments  adminis- 

tered here  in  England,  before  any  set- 
tlement of  a  church  in  Rome.  For  St. 
Gildas,  the  ancientest  monument  we 
have,  and  whom  the  Romanists  them- 
selves reverence,  says  expressly,  that  the 
religion  of  Christ  was  received  inBrittany, 
tempore  (ut  scimus)  summo  Tiberii  Cae- 
saris,  &c.  in  the  latter  time  of  Tibe- 
rius Caesar,  Gildas  de  Excid.  Brit. ; 
whereas  St.  Peter  kept  in  Jewry  long 
after  Tiberius  his  death.  Therefore 
the  first  conversion  of  this  island  to  the 
faith  was  not  by  St.  Peter ;  nor  from 
Rome,  which  was  not  then  a  church. 
Against  this  Rich.  Broughton,  in  his 
Ecclesiastical  History  of  Great  Britain, 
centur.  i.  c.  8.  §.  4,  says  expressly, 
"  That  the  protestants  do  freely  ac- 
knowledge, that  this  clause  of  the  time 
of  Tiberius  (tempore  summo  Tiberii 
CcBsaris)  is  wanting  in  other  copies  of 
that  holy  writer,  arid  namely,  in  that 
which  was  set  forth  by  Pol.  Virgil  and 
others."  Whereas  first  these  words  are 
express  in  a  most  fair  and  ancient  ma- 
nuscript of  Gildas,  to  be  seen  in  sir 
Rob.  Cotton's  study,  if  any  doubt  it. 
Secondly,  these  words  are  as  express  in 
the  printed  edition  of  Gildas  by  Polyd. 
Virg.,  which  edition  was  printed  at 
London,  anno  1525,  and  was  never  re- 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  263 

had  a  great  care  committed  unto  her,  in  and  from  the  prime  Sect.  35. 
times  of  the  church,  and  to  her  bishop  in  her :  but  at  this 
time  (to  let  pass  many  brawls  that  have  formerly  been  in  the 
house)  England,  and  some  other  sisters  of  hers,  are  fallen  out 
in  the  family.  What  then  2  Will  the  Father  and  the  mother, 
God  and  the  church,  cast  one  child  out  because  another  is 
angry  with  it  2  Or  when  did  Christ  give  that  power  to  an 
elder  sister,  that  she  and  her  steward,  the  bishop  there, 
should  thrust  out  what  child  she  pleased?  especially  when 
she  herself  is  justly  accused  to  have  given  the  offence  that  is 
taken  in  the  house.  Or  will  not  both  Father  and  mother  be 
sharper  to  her,  for  this  unjust  and  unnatural  usage  of  her 
younger  sisters,  but  their  dear  children  2  Nay,  is  it  not  the 
next  way  to  make  them  turn  her  out  of  doors,  that  is  so 
unnatural  to  the  rest  2  It  is  well  for  all  Christian  men  and 
churches,  that  the  Father  and  mother  of  them  are  not  so 
cursed  as  some  would  have  them.  And  salvation  need  not  be 
feared  of  any  dutiful  child,  nor  outing  from  the  church,  be- 
cause this  elder  sister's  faults  are  discovered  in  the  house, 
and  she  grown  frovvard  for  it  against  them  that  complained. 
But  as  children  cry  when  they  are  waked  out  of  sleep,  so  do 
you,  and  wrangle  with  all  that  come  near  you.  And  k  Staple- 
ton  confesses,  "  That  ye  were  in  a  dead  sleep  and  overmuch 
rest,  when  the  protestants  stole  upon  you.1'  Now  if  you  can 
prove  that  Rome  is  properly  the  !  catholic  church  itself,  (as 

printed  since.  Thirdly,  these  words  are  Jewel,  Art.  4.  Untruth  105. 
as  express  in  the  edition  of  Gildas  by  1  For  1  am  sure  there  is  a  Roman 
Joh.  Joseline,  printed  at  London  also,  church  that  is  but  a  particular.  Bel- 
anno  1568.  And  this  falsehood  of  larm.  de  Rom.  Pont.  lib.  iv.  c.  4.  And 
Broughton  is  so  much  the  more  foul,  then  you  must  either  shew  me  another 
because  he  boasts  (Prefat,  to  his  Reader,  Roman  church  which  is  the  catholic, 
fine),  "That  he  hath  seen  and  dili-  or  you  must  shew  how  one  and  the 
gently  perused  the  most  and  best  monu-  same  Roman  church  is  in  different  re- 
ments  arid  antiquities  extant,"  &c.  For  spects  or  relations  a  particular,  and  yet 
if  he  did  not  see  and  peruse  these,  he  is  the  catholic.  Which  is  not  yet  done, 
vainly  false  to  say  it :  if  he  did  see  And  I  do  not  say,  a  particular,  and  yet 
them,  he  is  most  maliciously  false  to  a  catholic;  but  a  particular,  and  yet 
belie  them.  And  lastly,  whereas  he  the  catholic  church.  For  so  you  speak, 
says  the  protestants  themselves  con-  For  that  which  card.  Peroii  hath,  that 
fess  so  much,  I  must  believe  he  is  as  the  Roman  church  is  the  catholic  cans- 
false  in  this  as  in  the  former,  till  he  ally,  because  it  infuses  universality 
name  the  protestants  to  me  which  do  into  all  the  whole  body  of  the  catholic 
confess  it.  And  when  he  doth,  he  shall  church,  can,  I  think,  satisfy  no  man 
gain  but  this  from  me,  that  those  pro-  that  reads  it ;  that  a  particular  should 
testants  which  confessed  it  were  mis-  infuse  universality  into  an  universal, 
taken.  For  the  thing  is  mistaken.  Peron's  Reply,  lib.  iv.  c.  9. 
k  Return  of  Untruths  upon  Mr. 


Archbishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  35, 36.  you  commonly  call  it,)  speak  out  and  prove  it.  In  the  mean 
time  you  may  mark  this  too,  if  you  will,  and  it  seems  you  do ; 
for  here  you  forget  not  what  the  bishop  said  to  you. 

-[p.  The  lady  which  doubted  (said  the  bishop  to  me)  may 

be  better  saved  in  it  than  you. 

Sect.  36.  23,  I  said  so  indeed.  Mark  that  too.  Where  yet  by  the 
way  these  words,  "  than  you,"  do  not  suppose  person  only. 
For  I  will  judge  mno  man  that  hath  another  master  to  stand 
or  fall  to.  But  they  suppose  calling  and  sufficiency  in  the 
person.  "  Than  you,"  that  is,  "  than  any  man  of  your  call- 
ing and  knowledge,"  of  whom  more  is  required.  And  then 
no  question  of  the  truth  of  this  speech,  "  that  that  person 
may  better  be  saved,"  that  is,  easier,  "  than  you,"  than  any 
man  that  knows  so  much  of  truth,  and  opposes  against  it,  as 
you,  and  others  of  your  calling  do.  How  far  you  know  truth, 
other  men  may  judge  by  your  proofs,  and  causes  of  know- 
ledge ;  but  how  far  you  oppose  truth  known  to  you,  that  is 
within,  and  no  man  can  know  but  God  and  yourselves. 
Howsoever,  where  the  foundation  is  but  held,  "  there  for 
"ordinary  men.  it  is  not  the  vivacity  of  understanding,  but 
the  simplicity  of  believing,  that  makes  them  safe."  For  St, 
Augustine  speaks  there  of  men  in  the  church ;  and  no  °man 
can  be  said  simply  to  be  out  of  the  visible  church,  that  is 
baptized,  and  holds  the  foundation.  And  as  it  is  the  sim- 
plicity of  believing  that  makes  them  safe,  yea,  safest,  so  is  it 
sometimes  a  quickness  of  understanding,  that,  loving  itself 
and  some  by -respects  too  well,  makes  men  take  up  an  unsafe 

m  Rom.  xiv.  4.  et  excommunicationis  gladio  spirituali- 

n  Caeteram  turbam  non  intelligent  ter  occiditur.     Stapl.  Controv.  i.  q.  2. 

vivacitas,  sed  credendi  simplicitas  tutis-  Art.  3.  Notabil.  3. 
simam  facit.     S.  August,  cont.   Fund.         "  The  apostle  pronounces  some  gone 

c.  4. — 2w£et  7roAAa/«s  rbt/  \abv  rt»  a£a-  out,  St.  John  ii.  19,  from  the  fellowship 

ffaviffTov,  Naz.  Orat.  21.;   omission  of  of  sound  believers,    when   as   yet   the 

inquiry  many  times  saves  the  people.  Christian  religion  they  had  not  utterly 

o  "  Heretics  in  respect  of  the  profes-  cast  off.     In  like  sense  and  meaning, 

sion  of  sundry   divine  verities,   which  throughout  all  ages,  heretics  have  justly 

they  still  retain  in  common  with  right  been  hated,  as  branches  cut  off  from 

believers,  &c.  do   still   pertain   to   the  the  true  vine ;  yet  only  so  far  forth  cut 

church."  Field,  de  Eccles.  lib.  i.  c.  14 off  as  the  heresies  have  extended.    For 

Potest  aliquis   ecclesiae  membrum  esse  both   heresy,  and   many   other   crimes 

secundum  quid,  qui  tamen  simpliciter  which  wholly  sever  from  God  do  sever 

non  est.    Haereticus  recedens  a  fide  non  from  the  church  of  God   but  in  part 

dimittitur  ut  paganus,  sed  propter  bap-  only."  Hooker's  Eccles.  Pol.  b.  v.  §.  68. 
tismi  characterem  punitur  ut  transfuga, 

Fisher  the  Jesuit.  265 

way  about  the  faith.  So  that  there  is  no  question  but  many  Sect.  36. 
were  saved  in  corrupted  times  of  the  church,  when  their 
"  Pleaders,  unless  they  repented  before  death,  were  lost." 
And  ()  St.  Augustine's  rule  will  be  true,  that  in  all  corruptions 
of  the  church,  "  there  will  ever  be  a  difference  between  an 
heretic,  and  a  plain  well-meaning  man  that  is  misled  and 
believes  an  heretic."  Yet  here  let  me  add  this  for  fuller 
expression :  this  must  be  understood  of  such  leaders  and 
heretics  as  r refuse  to  hear  the  church's  instruction,  or  to  use 
all  the  means  they  can  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth.  For  else,  if  they  do  this,  err  they  may,  but  heretics 
they  are  not,  as  is  most  manifest  in  sSt.  Cyprian's  case  of  re- 
baptization.  For  here,  though  he  were  a  main  leader  in  that 
error,  yet  all  the  whole  church  grant  him  safe,  and  his  *  fol- 
lowers in  danger  of  damnation.  But  if  any  man  be  a  leader, 
and  a  teaching  heretic,  and  will  add  u  schism  to  heresy,  and 
be  obstinate  in  both ;  he,  without  repentance,  must  needs  be 
lost,  while  many  that  succeed  him  in  the  error  only,  without 
the  obstinacy,  may  be  saved  :  for  they  which  are  misled,  and 
swayed  with  the  current  of  the  time,  hold  the  same  errors  with 
their  misleaders,  yet  not  supinely,  but  with  all  sober  dili- 
gence to  find  out  the  truth ;  not  pertinaciously,  but  with  all 
readiness  to  submit  to  truth  so  soon  as  it  shall  be  found ;  not 
uncharitably,  but  retaining  an  internal  communion  with  the 
whole  visible  church  of  Christ  in  the  fundamental  points  of 
faith,  and  the  performance  of  acts  of  charity ;  not  factiously, 
but  with  an  earnest  desire  and  a  sincere  endeavour  (as  their 
place  and  calling  gives  them  means)  for  a  perfect  union  and 
communion  of  all  Christians  in  truth  as  well  as  peace.  I  say, 

P   Ipsis  magistris  pereuntibus ;    nisi  t  Donatistae    vero   (qui   de  Cypriani 

forte   ante  mortem  resipuerint.    Luth.  authoritate  sibi  carnaliter  blandiuntur, 

de  Serv.  Arbit.  S.  August,  de  Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  lib.  i. 

Haeresiarchae  plus  peccant,  quam  alii  c.  18.)  nimium  miseri,  et,  nisi  se  corri- 

qui  haeresin  aliquam  sunt  secuti.    Sup-  gant,  a  semetipsis  omnino  damnati,  qui 

plem.  Tho.  99.  A.  4.  C.  hoc  in  tan  to  viro  eligunt  imitari.    Ibid. 

<i  Si   mihi   videretur  unus   et   idem  c.  19. 

haereticus  et  hsereticis  credens  homo,  u  Rei  falsitatis  (circa  accusatum  Gee- 
Ac.  S.  August,  de  Util.  Cred.  lib.  i.  cilianum)  deprehensi  Donatistae,  perti- 
c.  i.  et  Kpist.  162.  ad  Donatist.  Episc.  naci  dissensione  firmata,  schisma  in  hae- 

r  S.  Matt,  xviii.  1 7.    Qui  oppugnant  resin  veterunt.  S.  August,  lib.  de  Haeres. 

regulam  veritatis.     S.  August,    lib.    de  haer.  69. — Et  tales,  sub  vocabulo  Chris- 

Haeresibus,  versus  finem.  tiano,  doctrines  resistant  Christianas.  S. 

s  Cyprianus  beatus,  et  martyr.  S.Au-  August,  de  Civ.  Dei,   lib.  xviii.  0.51. 

gust,  de  Bapt.  cont.  Donat.  lib.  i.  c.  18.  prin. 

ArcJibishop  Laud  against 

Sect.  36, 3  7.  these,  however  misled,  are  neither  heretics  nor  schismatics 
in  the  sight  of  God,  and  are  therefore  in  a  state  of  salvation. 
And  were  not  this  true  divinity,  it  would  go  very  hard  with 
many  poor  Christian  souls,  that  have  been  and  are  misled  on 
all  sides,  in  these  and  other  distracted  times  of  the  church  of 
Christ ;  whereas,  thus  habituated  in  themselves,  they  are,  by 
God's  mercy,  safe  in  the  midst  of  those  waves  in  which  their 
misleaders  perish.  I  pray  you  mark  this ;  and  so,  by  God's 
grace,  will  I :  for  our  x reckoning  will  be  heavier,  if  we  thus 
mislead  on  either  side,  than  theirs  that  follow  us.  But  I  see 
I  must  look  to  myself,  for  you  are  secure ;  for, 

Jp,  Dr.  White  (said  I)  hath  secured  me,  that  none  of  our 
errors  be  damnable,  so  long  as  we  hold  them  not  against 
our  conscience.  And  I  hold  none  against  my  conscience. 
Sect.  37.  33. — I.  It  seems  then  you  have  two  securities,  Dr.  White's 
assertion  and  your  conscience.  What  assurance  Dr.  White 
gave  you  I  cannot  tell  of  myself;  nor,  as  things  stand,  may 
I  rest  upon  your  relation.  It  may  be  you  use  him  no  better 
than  you  do  me.  And  sure  it  is  so  ;  for  I  have  since  spoken 
with  Dr.  White,  the  late  reverend  bishop  of  Ely,  and  he 
avows  this,  and  no  other  answer.  He  was  asked,  in  the 
conference  between  you,  whether  popish  errors  were  funda- 
mental. To  this  he  gave  an  answer,  by  distinction  of  the  per- 
sons which  held  and  professed  the  errors ;  namely,  that  the 
errors  were  fundamental  reductive,  by  a  reducement,  if  they 
which  embraced  them  did  pertinaciously  adhere  to  them,  hav- 
ing sufficient  means  to  be  better  informed.  Nay,  further, 
that  they  were  materially,  and  in  the  very  kind  and  nature 
of  them